• 
 
 
 
 % 
 
 
 = O v 
 
 \ +~r 
 
 '% 
 
 V- ,^v 
 
 ^ ^ 
 
 \ 'j 
 
 otf 
 
 ,0 o 
 
 

 £ r <K 
 
 .>. " 1/ i - 
 
 sS> 
 
 "^'. 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 °*. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 V * * A '->, 
 
 
 "O, 
 
 
 
 V 
 
 
 
 ^ % 
 
 
 
 ^v 
 
 x°°- 
 
 '•■« ^ '"' ^ ' A)' .OKC ,'V' 
 
 ^> '- 
 
 
 
 ■0' * 
 
 
 
 %>.# 
 
 
 
 0c> 
 
 .A* 
 
 
 ,\>' -p- 
 
 -<p, <p 
 
 
TIIK 
 
 SOPHISTES AND POLITICUS 
 
 / 
 OF PLATO, 
 
 WITH 
 
 A REVISED TEXT AND ENGLISH NOTES, 
 
 BY THE 
 
 REV. LEWIS CAMPBELL, M.A. 
 
 PROFESSOR OF GREEK IN THE UNIVERSITY OF ST. ANDREWS. 
 
 OXFORD: 
 
 AT THE CLARENDON PRESS. 
 M.DCCC.LXVII. 
 
k 
 
 
 
 
 
 :\ 
 
 CL.^% \aLj- 
 
TO THE SENATUS 
 
 OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ST. ANDREWS 
 
 ^Jns S^Horli ts respectfully Enscrtfotr. 
 
 Tof? Koivfj tl Trp&TTOvcriv ayairrjTov 6[iovoeLV. 
 
 Plat. Polit. 260 b. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 THE present work is a continuation of an edition 
 of Plato's Thesetetus which appeared at Oxford in 
 1861. Where these are inconsistent with each 
 other, the editor hopes that his later will be 
 found to correct his earlier views. 
 
 Bekker's various readings from thirteen MSS., 
 and Stallbaum's from the six collated by him, 
 have been carefully consulted in revising the text. 
 It is to be regretted that later editors of Plato 
 have not had the opportunity of collating the seven 
 MSS. which Bekker saw in Italy in 1817-18, but 
 does not refer to in his Commentary. Schneider 
 also, in his edition of the Republic, mentions having 
 seen at Florence a MS. containing the Politicus, 
 which appeared to him to be of considerable value. 
 The readings of the Bodleian MS. are fully re- 
 corded by Gaisford in his Lectiones Platonicse, 
 the publication of which led Bekker to dispense 
 
V\X EFACE. 
 
 with his intended visit to Oxford ("nolui actum 
 agere"). The MS., however, has been ((insulted 
 afresh, and several new readings from it will be 
 found in the notes, for the most part of little 
 moment, and agreeing with Vat, A. and Ven. IT. 
 The special errors of the Bodleian, as of other 
 MSS. of the calligraphi, are generally of a super- 
 ficial kind. The omission of accents and of the 
 iota of the imperfect diphthongs is curiously fre- 
 quent. In these dialogues this MS. has only one 
 instance of contraction, viz. ovvlioi for ovpavw in 
 Polit. 273 c. But there is, perhaps, evidence of 
 the earlier use of contractions in the mistaken 
 expansion of aKpoav into aicpifiwv (Theset. 148 c), and 
 
 of Trpa.'yiJ.aTeia.v into 7rapaSeiyfj.a.Teiav (Polit. 279 a). 
 Compare Pllileb. 36 e : irdcra^ cKppotrvvais V. 1. wapa- 
 (ppocrvvais. 
 
 Corrupt places have been marked with obeli, 
 and the most probable corrections are printed in 
 large type in the notes. Words whose authority 
 is doubtful, from their omission in some MSS., are 
 bracketed. 
 
 A few conjectural emendations, which appeared 
 highly probable, have been admitted or retained 
 from former editions. These are marked with 
 asterisks, that the reader may have some intima- 
 tion of the state of the text. 
 
PREFACE. 9 
 
 The Sophist has been edited in Germany, with 
 explanatory notes, by Heindorf and Stallbaum : 
 the Politicns only by Stallbaum, who, although 
 abundantly familiar with Plato, is inferior to 
 Heindorf in taste and judgment. Many scholars 
 have contributed to the elucidation of particular 
 points. But these dialogues, perhaps more than 
 most other ancient writings, require for their 
 interpretation that they should be taken as a 
 separate whole, and studied by their own light. 
 
 To <5' airiov, tt>? oi/uLai, TrpoXovaiv ov% tjttov earai 
 KctTCKpaves. (Polit. 287 b.) 
 
SOPHIST AND STATESMAN 
 
 PLATO. 
 
 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 -A.S the discovery of truth and the direction of life are the 
 twofold function of philosophy, so Plato saw a twofold counter- 
 feit of his ideal educator and governor in the professors of 
 wisdom and the public men of his time. The one corrupted in- 
 quiry with controversy, the other spoiled politics with faction. 
 These Sophists and party leaders seemed to exhaust between 
 them the serious interest of the Greek world. ; for the poets, 
 sculptors, painters, and other " imitators with their child's 
 play/' were by this time of less account. There might be 
 jealousies between these two great powers, who formed the 
 intellect and heart of every state, but they were usually in 
 league, and together held the public ear. Rarely, either in 
 the present or the past, might be traced the footprints of a 
 more august presence; of a Divine spirit "coming down in 
 the likeness" of sage or legislator. Such glimpses of the Phi- 
 losopher and true potentate were few and far between, and 
 he had always been either misunderstood or rejected by man- 
 kind. The writer of these dialogues, whom for the present 
 we assume to be Plato, seems to have viewed this spectacle 
 with a feeling strangely mixed of curiosity, interest, and scorn. 
 In approaching his subject by a circuitous track, he makes 
 inquiry the vehicle of satire, and satire of inquiry. But it is 
 not to be inferred from this that the inquiry or even the per- 
 plexity which he exhibits here is merely ironical. On the 
 b 
 
ii (iEXKRAL IXTKOD! (TION. 
 
 contrary, Plato is nowhere more intensely speculative, nor is 
 the aim of his discussion anywhere more real. This appears 
 even from the form in which the questions are asked. In 
 other dialogues the character of Gorgias or Protagoras, Thra- 
 s\ machus or Polus, is dramatized, and certain hints thrown out 
 as to the nature of their profession; casual remarks are made 
 on the career of Pericles, Themistocles, and other servants of 
 the state: but here not a single name is mentioned; the spirit 
 of inquiry (as described in the Theaetetus) refuses to deseend 
 to individuals or to things near at hand, and the ideal Sophist, 
 the ideal Statesman, each character in the utmost generality, 
 is at once represented and defined. Again, in other dialogues 
 certain abstract questions are proposed, such as, What is cou- 
 rage, prudence, justice? and in the Theaetetus, What is know- 
 ledge '( But even " Sophistic" is not a purely abstract con- 
 ception : the Sophists were a real class of persons, having, as 
 Plato believed, certain common characteristics. The state also 
 is an essentially complex thing, and the statesman can only 
 be known in relation to the state. This union of the universal 
 and the real, this personifying of a general notion, this attempt 
 to descend into the complexity of life without losing hold of 
 metaphysical conceptions, may be regarded, even on an external 
 view, as a leading peculiarity of these two dialogues. 
 
 And the form in this case truly indicates the substance; for 
 these writings are, together with the Theaetetus, the most dis- 
 tinct record which remains to us of a great effort, of which other 
 traces are found in the Parmenides and Philebus, by which Plato 
 endeavoured to bridge over the gulf which the first impulse of 
 philosophy had made between the absoluteness of Knowledge 
 and Being and the relativeness of Sensation and Appearance. 
 In some dialogues the phenomenal side of this antithesis, while 
 dramatically represented with great liveliness, is dialectically 
 annihilated; opinion, custom, the conceit of knowledge, are 
 brought on the stage with ironical circumstance for a prepared 
 overthrow; and the difficulty is stated, but not fully met — How 
 can virtue, not based on science, be virtue at all ? But here 
 the same difficulty is presented in a more general aspect. The 
 hollowness of pretended wisdom, and the futility of existing 
 governments, are taken for granted or summarily proved. But 
 the question is, How can the real and the apparent, the ideal 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. iii 
 
 and actual, coexist? And yet they must. For the non- 
 existent cannot bo the object of attack ; and unless true ideas 
 can be brought to bear on the actual circumstances of men, 
 there is no hope of remedying the evils of which the world is 
 full. This speculative doubt, while giving rise to certain 
 changes in Plato's theory of Knowledge, forms the link be- 
 tween these dialogues and the Thcastctus. That their con- 
 nexion with that dialogue is not merely outward, is the more 
 probable because the Theastetus, though ending, like the 
 Philebus, with a promise of further talk, wears no appearance 
 of being the first instalment of a larger design. But if, as 
 would appear from this, the two dialogues were conceived and 
 written at a later time, their author would not, without good 
 reason, present them as a continuation of an earlier writing. 
 And it may be regarded as a sufficient reason, that he was 
 now engaged with the more objective phase of the same anti- 
 thesis, of which the subjective aspect was developed in the 
 Thesetetus ; for the opposition between the Absolute and 
 Relative, which the mind experiences in contrasting Know- 
 ledge with Sensation and Opinion, is also seen by her as the 
 contrast between the Real and the Unreal, and between the 
 Ideal and the Actual ; when, for instance, the pretended wise 
 man is compared with the true lover of wisdom, and the great 
 men of this world with the perfect King. The chief aim of 
 each inquiry, however, is not so much to point the antithesis, 
 as to draw together the opposite poles ; to find room for the 
 relative beside the absolute ; to obtain a meeting-point between 
 idea and fact. As in the Thesetetus the question, " How is 
 false opinion possible?" was met by an unsuccessful effort 
 to conceive the mode in which thought acts on sensation 
 and memory, so in the " Sophist" there is raised the parallel 
 question, How can that which is not, appear to be? And 
 this doubt is, for the present at least, removed by raising 
 Difference (i. e. Negation) to the rank of an idea or category, 
 which has "communion" with, or participates in, Reality or 
 Being, and may thus become the object of thought. The cor- 
 responding difficulty in the Politicus has a double aspect. First, 
 What place is there for an ideal of government at all ? This 
 question is answered by the supposition of alternate cycles, in 
 which the world is first guided and then left alone by God. 
 b 2 
 
i\ GENERAL ENTRODUCTION. 
 
 Secondly; How is science to be applied to government during 
 the inferior cycle in which we now livei* The latter question 
 is only provisionally answered; but in a way which points to 
 the conception of an accommodation or oevre/jos tt\ovs, which 
 Plato afterwards embodied in the Laws. 
 
 The main difficulty which assumes these different forms (that 
 of the relation of ideas to phenomena) is clearly stated in the 
 I'armenides (to which dialogue allusion is made in the Thea> 
 letus, and again in the Sophist), and receives a passing notice 
 at the opening of the Philebus. And the final elucidation of 
 the whole subject, the delineation of the bright form of Being, 
 the reconcilement of the speculative with the practical reason, 
 and the attainment of a perfect method, were probably the 
 destined task of the " Philosopher," a dialogue which was to 
 have ended this series or tetralogy of dialogues, but which it 
 does not appear that Plato ever composed. Whether he in- 
 stinctively turned back from an impossible enterprize, or whe- 
 ther, after he had once descended into the phenomenal world, 
 ethical and cosmical intci'ests predominated over the merely 
 speculative, it is clear that the aspiration after an ideal 
 certainty which appears in these dialogues, and also in the 
 Republic and elsewhere, but which is here combined with a 
 promise that the very exactness of truth (clvto 7-d(cpt/3e5, Polit. 
 284 d) shall be hereafter displayed, is nowhere satisfied. Nor 
 was the hope attainable in the infancy of science. But it is 
 not unlikely that Plato intended to place this keystone of the 
 dialectical fabric when he should take in hand to define the 
 Philosopher. 
 
 We have before us, therefore, the middle portion of an 
 unfinished work, looking backwards on the Thesetetus, pro- 
 bably across an interval (with a momentary glance at the 
 Parmenides), and forwards to an unwritten dialogue. Having 
 taken note of this, we may draw a little closer, — to a point, 
 however, from which the two dialogues can still be taken in 
 one view. There are marked and obvious differences be- 
 tween them. But these will be better seen when they are 
 examined separately : in a general survey it is more im- 
 portant to notice, without exaggerating, the features which 
 they have in common. 
 
 § 1. The subjects of both dialogues arc nearly related to 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. v 
 
 each other. The Sophist and Statesman were, as already 
 noticed, the main representatives of the world as it then was, 
 of the leading thoughts and principles of Plato's contempo- 
 raries. Could these typical men be reduced under definitions t 
 Was a scientific knowledge of them possible ? Did the vague- 
 ness of the science which they professed extend also to them- 
 selves? In what relation did the Sophist stand to the Philo- 
 sopher, or the members of existing governments to the true 
 King? There is however this difference of treatment: that 
 whereas the " Sophist" is from the beginning a search for the 
 definition of pretended knowledge, the distinction between 
 reality and pretence only appears in the Politicus towards 
 the close. 
 
 § 2. In both an extreme or premature ideal theory is modi- 
 fied : in the Sophist the dictum of Parmenides annihilating 
 " Not-Being ;" in the Politicus the Pythagorean notion of a 
 theocracy under the Divine King. The mere abstract " num- 
 bers" of the same school, are exchanged in the Politicus (in 
 another connexion) for a relative standard determined by the 
 idea of Good (to jue'rptov) ; and, in the Sophist, either the 
 same Pythagoreans, or the Megarians, or some of Plato's own 
 followers, are criticized as the " Friends of Ideas." 
 
 § 3. In both there is a deep vein of irony, or rather of 
 satire. The assertion of Socher, that in these dialogues the 
 Socratic irony is silent, could only be justified if it had been 
 meant that the irony is rather that of Plato. The humour 
 with which the chase after the Sophist is maintained, the fear 
 of his great cunning, the solemnity with which he is described 
 as a soul-purifier; and in the Politicus, the notion of the crane 
 exalting himself at man's expense, the quiet substitution of 
 Lydians and Phrygians for Hellenes as distinguished from 
 Barbarians, and the description of a state in which navigation 
 and medicine should be administered according to legal pre- 
 scription, are touches of an irony singularly Platonic. It is 
 true that the wild playfulness of the Phsedrus and the dramatic 
 liveliness of the Republic are absent, and that the humour 
 is not unmixed with bitterness ; but the occasional shadow of 
 misanthropy is not more unlike the caustic cheerfulness of 
 the Gorgias and Meno, than is the sad smile and sober 
 colouring of the Laws. Two points may be noticed in which 
 
vi OENERAL [NTRODUCTION. 
 
 the dialectical method conveys the effect of irony. First, 
 n is remarked thai science is a great leveller, she cares 
 equally for Bmall and great; hence the physician and the bath- 
 man are equally good examples of the purifier; the general 
 is a species of huntsman, so is the vermin-killer; priest, pro- 
 phet, archon-basileus, are servants equally with the shopkeeper 
 and the household slave. Akin to this is the mode in which 
 the Sophist is thrust down by the process of divisions, and is 
 found in a low place amongst the class of imitators; just as 
 Pleasure in the Philebus, after aiming at the highest rank, has 
 assigned to her, by the same process, the fifth and lowest. 
 
 § 4. Both dialogues are pervaded, or rather haunted, by 
 the idea of scientific method. Every inquiry, even that con- 
 cerning Government, is held to be important, chiefly as an 
 exercise by which the dialectical faculty may be improved. 
 The nature and function of this power are described in each 
 dialogue in language which forcibly recals the well-known 
 passages of the Phsedrus and Philebus, and which even the 
 most doubtful critic must admit to have a Platonic flavour. 
 
 " To distinguish things according to their kinds, and neither 
 to account the same form to be another nor another to be the 
 same, is surely the work of dialectic. And the dialectician 
 is he who adequately perceives one idea pervading many 
 separate things, and many distinct ideas embraced by one, 
 and many such wholes pervaded and knit together in one 
 crowning form, — many also completely isolated and sundered. 
 And what is this but to know how to distinguish the respects 
 in which each kind admits or rejects communion with other 
 kinds V (Soph. 253 d, e.) 
 
 " But because they have not been accustomed to distinguish 
 the subject of an inquiry into its forms, they not only confound 
 things so widely different as the More and the Too-much, the 
 moment they see a similarity between them, but fall also into 
 the converse error of dividing things not according to their 
 parts ; whereas the right way is, when one first perceives com- 
 munity in a multitude of things, not to desist till one have 
 seen all the differences contained within that common nature, 
 all, that is, which rest upon any logical distinction; and on 
 the other hand when dissimilarities are seen in a mass of 
 objects, the eye should be incapable of contentment or rest, 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. vii 
 
 until one have confined all that is kindred within the pule of 
 one resemblance, and fenced them round with the new crea- 
 tion of a single kind or category." (Polit. 285 a-c.) 
 
 The notions of Sameness and Difference, and of the corre- 
 sponding arts of collection or combination, and division or 
 distinction (aw ay coy 1), bia[peais, avyKpuiK.r\, btaKptTLKij), are pro- 
 minent in many places of these dialogues. The Elenchus is 
 described as purifying, that is, dividing the good from the 
 bad. The chief " kinds" next to Being, are Same and Other. 
 Dialectic is the science of the communion and exclusion of 
 kinds, and language itself would be impossible without a 
 similar process of combination and distinction. And these 
 logical forms have also a practical bearing ; for the art of 
 the true statesman, like that of the weaver, consists in com- 
 bining elements which have been first separated and purified. 
 Thus it appears that the process of classification, involving 
 generalization and division (avvaywyr] and biaipecnn), is only a 
 particular application of a form of thought to which a meta- 
 physical and a practical as well as a logical importance is 
 attributed. But it has been felt that the " dichotomous " 
 classifications of these dialogues are a caricature of method, 
 and are unlike anything which is to be found elsewhere in 
 Plato. "Are we to suppose," it has been asked % "that the 
 Dichotomous Method of the Sojjhistes Dialogue (I may add 
 of the Politicus, for the method is the same in this dialogue 
 also) is the method of division of a subject according to its 
 natural members, of which Plato speaks in the Phsedrus?" 
 Is it the same, it may be further asked, which Plato has him- 
 self used in the Phasdrus, Gorgias, Philebus, Republic, and 
 elsewhere ? The likeness is unmistakeable, (compare espe- 
 cially the close of the " Sophist'''' with that of the Philebus and 
 of the sixth book of the Republic) ; but so also is the differ- 
 ence, consisting partly in the extent to which the method is 
 carried, and partly in the arbitrary and superficial character 
 of some of the divisions, when compared with the dialectical 
 analysis of madness in the Phasdrus, or with that of pleasure 
 in the Philebus. And although there is no reason to suppose 
 that the division of each kind into two parts only was a novelty 
 (for this is required in the Philebus), there appears a further 
 
 a By Dr. Whewell. Cambridge Phil, Soc, Tr. vol. ix. pt. 4. p. 594. 
 
viii GENERAL [NTRODUCTION. 
 
 refinement on this notion, when, in the Politicus | 262 b), the 
 pupil is advised to divide each as nearly as possible in half. 
 
 It has liccii suggested, in order to explain this difference, 
 that thf ThesBtetus and Sophista (with the Politicus) were 
 
 meant respectively to serve as examples of the two parts of the 
 Dialectic process; the Theffltetus of avvayuyrj, the Sophista 
 and Politicus of Statpeaty. But although the Theaetetus affords 
 many good specimens of Socratic induction, it is not less fertile 
 in the negative instances by which that induction was tested. 
 Generalization thus alternates with distinction or division 1 '. 
 On the other hand, no more striking example of avvaycayr] 
 could be given than the generalization of OrjpevTiKi] in the 
 Sophist, or the seven categories of industry in the Politicus. 
 And in the latter dialogue a separate discussion is devoted to 
 the subject of example, that is, the act of bringing resemblances 
 together (avvayeiv). The existence of such an intention, then, 
 can hardly be established, and the comparison of the Theae- 
 tetus only throws the characteristic peculiarity of these dia- 
 logues into stronger relief. 
 
 We learn from a comic fragment (quoted at length by 
 Dr. Thompson of Cambridge, in his paper on the genuineness of 
 the Sophista) that when Plato, Speusippus, and Menedemus were 
 together in the Academy, they and their scholars were ridi- 
 culed for their endless minute classification of natural objects; 
 and Aristotle speaks more than once of " written divisions" 
 (yeypaufxevai StatpeVets), which, as they seem in some points to 
 have coincided with those advanced in these dialogues, may be 
 conjectured to have been extant in the school of Plato. It seems 
 not improbable that this new passion for classification as a me- 
 thod of science, which had a germ in Socrates and the Eleatics, 
 and ripened afterwards into the analytic of Aristotle, was in 
 full bloom at the Academy when these dialogues were written, 
 and that Plato, who entered into every phase of thought, but 
 
 ffvvaywyri, 
 
 
 Sialpecris, 
 
 67ritrT7]|U7) = aicrdrjens * 
 
 
 4iri(frr)fj.y] ovic alffdyais' 
 
 w aladavnfxeOa = ^vxv- 
 
 
 86£a a\-r)Qr)S, \pevSfis' 
 
 aAridJis aArjOijs fxcTa \6you 
 
 KivrjfTis = aWoioiais, (popa. 
 
 c A then. II. 59 ; Com 
 
 Gr. 
 
 Fr. VIII. p. 370, ed. Meineke. 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. ix 
 
 was entirely possessed by none, took up the method, as he 
 takes up that of etymologies in the Cratylus, " for the day." 
 This may account for the unusual number of the divisions. 
 But how is the peculiar nature of many of them to be ex- 
 plained : 
 
 a. First, the lesson is meant to be progressive. Thus the 
 external and superficial character of some distinctions is at once 
 accounted for by the often-repeated Platonic maxim, that the 
 elements of truth must be spelt out in easy syllables, before 
 the meaning of truth can be read. The most obvious data of 
 sense and experience are the primer of thought. The simplest 
 examples are chosen to illustrate principles of reason, not as 
 being adequate, but because they can be apprehended at once. 
 
 But there may be also traced in the method of these dia- 
 logues a progress of a deeper kind. The argument of the 
 Theaetetus, though generally destructive, left two results : 
 first, that the mind gathers from the impressions of different 
 senses certain common perceptions ; and secondly, that know- 
 ledge and right opinion imply distinction, i. e. definition by 
 the characteristic difference. This definition by difference, we 
 will suppose, was becoming recognised as an organ of know- 
 ledge, and the youth of Plato's school were delighted with 
 their new exercise. We can imagine them, according to their 
 master's description, rejoicing as if they had found a treasure of 
 inexhaustible wisdom, first rolling up the ball and then unrolling 
 and dividing, and never content till they had made everybody 
 else to share their wonder. The negative aspect of Socratic 
 inquiry, the controversial dialectic of Zeno, the Pythagorean 
 <TvaTotyJ.ai } had all contributed something to the intellectual 
 fashion now in vogue. In the " Sophist" Plato chooses to con- 
 verse with this " old friend with a new face," he will assay to 
 prove this weapon, which is obviously two-edged, and no less 
 available for controversy than for inquiry. He begins with an 
 example, which he executes in the most approved style, and 
 the method is found to be abundantly adequate to define the 
 fisherman. Then he tries several passes at the Sophist, but 
 does not transfix him, though the creature is soon driven into 
 a corner, and his enemy exults in an approaching triumph, 
 when suddenly the wily monster disarms him and turns against 
 him his own weapon. (Soph. 239 d.) 
 c 
 
x ( I EN ERAL I XT RODU< JT ION. 
 
 The exclusive divisions by which the game has been so 
 far pursued proceeded <>n the ground that Difference meant 
 logical exclusion; that, for instance, because making is dif- 
 ferent from acquiring, production and acquisition cannot be 
 attributes of the same art : and we have been surprised to sec 
 the Sophist starting up on the left side of the cordon which 
 wo had drawn, when we thought to have secured him on the 
 right. At last he seems to be convicted of pretence, that is 
 of appearing to be what he is not. He retorts that " what- 
 is-not" has no Being, and can neither be denned nor criti- 
 cized : a position which is only met by reconsidering the whole 
 question of negation and difference, and also of Being, in a 
 discussion where the vaunted method of exclusions is laid aside. 
 It is at last found that ideas which are distinguished from each 
 other may still be mutually related. Whereon follows the 
 remark that mere " oppositions of science" are not philosophy. 
 (Soph. 259.) The effect of this discovery may be traced in 
 the Politicus. Not only are the two elements of generalization 
 and distinction much more nearly balanced (it was always im- 
 possible for either of them to be entirely absent), but more 
 care is taken to define the relation between the members of 
 each division. The respondent is significantly warned that 
 every logical segment must be a natural part, and have a 
 form of its own, i. e. that the distinction must have a rational 
 ground or principle : he is told that the external resemblances 
 and differences of objects are easily mastered, but that there 
 are qualities of another sort, which cannot be perceived with- 
 out a " vision and a faculty divine/' A mistake arising from 
 dividing without generalizing sufficiently is corrected ; side by 
 side with the partition of science appears " the interrogation 
 of every nature, in order to learn what special contribution 
 each has to offer from the store of experience to the treasury 
 of wisdom ; " and we are reminded that it is not enough to 
 define a subject by a single characteristic difference, for that 
 nothing is completely known, until all other species, at least 
 those of the same genus, have been also distinguished and 
 defined. (Pol. 362, 285 e, 275, 272 e, 281 c.) 
 
 Thus mere logical division by means of negatives is criticized 
 by Plato on nearly the same ground as by Aristotle, who ob- 
 jects that a negative term as such is not divisible. "Aristotle," 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xi 
 
 says Mr. G. II. Lowes, " has here pointed out the scientific 
 error of all classification founded on negatives, and his criti- 
 cism reaches even the familiar division founded by Lamarck 
 between vertebrata and invertebrata. The vcrtebrata form a 
 natural division, characterized by an obvious peculiarity, but 
 to lump together all other animals, no matter how manifestly 
 different, merely on the negative character of their having 
 no vertebral column, is, except as a provisional expedient, 
 eminently unphilosophic" But Plato employs division by 
 exclusions precisely as a provisional expedient. His object 
 is not the classification of many things but the definition 
 of one d . He never attempts to divide a class which is only 
 known by a negative characteristic 6 . And he has himself 
 striven to remedy the defect in question ; for he has observed 
 that things are not perfectly distinguished until the mutually 
 exclusive positive qualities of both are known. 
 
 fi. Further, the end of this progressive lesson in dialectic is 
 not to exalt a formal method, but to quicken and regulate the 
 free action of the inquiring mind. Plato never conceived, as 
 some modern philosophers have done, that a new method 
 could possibly level intellects, or become a substitute for inven- 
 tion. He never imagines a form of thinking as separable 
 from thought. His dialectic is not a dead organon, but an 
 inspiration, a divine gift, which may be imperfectly described 
 in words, and by oral teaching may be awakened and stimu- 
 lated in the philosophic nature, but cannot be once for all 
 embodied in a book of aphorisms or a Chrestomathy. Dialectic 
 is the right application to the highest subjects of the twin 
 operations of distinction and combination, which are present as 
 elements in the simplest exercise of the reason : whether the 
 difference and resemblance noted be that of two fingers or of 
 two virtues, the process is essentially the same. But thought 
 is liable to perversion, and Plato is never weary of distinguish- 
 ing argument from controversy (Sia/Ve/cri/oj from avnXoyiKrj or 
 
 d This remark also supplies an an- and to Mr. G-rote's observation that 
 
 swer to the other objection of Ari- Plato would have objected to class 
 
 stotle, that the species of a genus are the wolf with the dog. 
 
 by this method sometimes unnaturally ° He always follows the " right 
 
 separated (e. g. birds are divided be- hand" section: Kara tovtt\ 5e|ia aet 
 
 tween the land and water animals), fxepos rov T/x-qOevros, Soph. 264 e. 
 
xii GENEH \L [NTRODUCTION. 
 
 (pHTTiioj). Perhaps controversy is too respectable a name for 
 that ape of the Elenchus, a barren hybrid between Zenonian 
 and Socratic method, which seems to have been a favourite 
 pastime in the schools of Athens as well as Megara. The 
 faults which Plato assigns to the devotees of this " illogical 
 logic" of disputation arc chiefly the following, (i) They con- 
 fused verbal with real agreement and difference. (2) They 
 assumed that agreement and difference must mutually exclude 
 each other not only in idea but in fact f . (3) They argued 
 about first principles when consequences were in question, and 
 vice versa. (Phasd. ioi e.) (4) They generalized too hastily 
 both in the way of induction and deduction. (Phileb. 17.) 
 
 (5) They chose sensible in the place of ideal distinctions. 
 
 (6) They substituted abstract reasoning from a single isolated 
 notion for real inquiry into the nature of things. (7) They 
 preferred the exercise of logical ingenuity to the common 
 interests of mankind. (" Water, the cheapest of commodities, 
 is the best, says Pindar," Euthyd, 304 b.) (8) From the 
 want of any true command of ideas, they distinguished in the 
 wrong place and failed to distinguish in the right. These 
 errors arose in great measure from making victory and not 
 truth the end of discussion, and the mental result of the pro- 
 cess was a vain-glorious scepticism. Such at least is Plato's ver- 
 dict on the character and tendency of much of the intellectual 
 activity of his day. And he has occasionally, even in the 
 person of Socrates, given not unconscious illustration of this 
 Attic euphuism, just as our own master of thought and ex- 
 pression sometimes condescended " to speak most infallibly" 
 in the " conceited" vein of his contemporaries. 
 
 Now it is a chief purpose of the present dialogues to coun- 
 teract this vice of the reason, by conveying wholesome ideas 
 about logical method. And one idea which they convey with 
 tolerable clearness, by example if not by precept, is that the 
 right course to be followed in an inquiry cannot be altogether 
 prescribed by rules, but is in great measure the direct result 
 of original thought and inventive power in the inquirer?. 
 
 f Plato seizes upon this as the key- gested, in the infancy of logic, the 
 
 stone of their method, a principle bor- notion that positive and negative attri- 
 
 rowed from the Eleatics,who in saying, butes are absolutely incommunicable. 
 
 " Being is," " Not-Being is not," sug- £ Cf. especially Phsedr. 269 e. 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xiii 
 
 Whether the method of divisions or some other shall be em- 
 ployed, what general form shall be selected for tho primary 
 division, where to draw the line in each subdivision, when 
 to introduce example and comparison, when to exchange 
 logical for metaphysical reasoning, and when to seek the 
 aid of imagination; all such points are entirely left to tho 
 prescient insight and selective judgment of the leader of the 
 discussion. 
 
 y. Another lesson not doubtfully taught in these pages is, 
 that the subtilty of nature is not exhausted by a single line 
 of classification. The several paths by which the Sophist is 
 approached, and the shorter and longer way to the definition 
 of the genus Homo in the Politicus (not to dwell now on the 
 ironical humour of this passage), shew that method has not yet 
 stiffened into system. The division of the arts of life not into 
 two but seven distinct "limbs," warrants the same inference, 
 which is strengthened by the comparison of other dialogues 
 (see next section), and by the playful and satirical uses of 
 generalization and division noticed above. (§ 3.) In both dia- 
 logues the "divisions" at the opening and the close belong 
 rather to the framework than the substance of the thought, 
 and the real movement of the argument is almost wholly in- 
 dependent of this outward form ; though certainly not inde- 
 pendent of the great laws of agreement and difference, of 
 which Plato's crvi/aycoyq and biaipeats are the expression. 
 
 Plato's views on method, when thus stated, may appear 
 strangely simple, as the errors to which they are opposed 
 were gross ; but the errors, however gross, were typical : 
 and his thoughts, however simple, may find many an instruc- 
 tive application in the later history of science. That all true 
 method is an extension of the natural operation of the mind, 
 and, instead of making inquiry an easy task for all men, is 
 inseparable from that last and highest acquisition and gift, the 
 philosophic spirit, are maxims of which the schoolmen and 
 Bacon were equally in need. The " prudens qugestio" of the 
 latter (the " mental initiative" of Coleridge) is a notion which, 
 at the expense of consistency, redeems the misconception of a 
 levelling method by approaching to the Platonic point of view. 
 Nor is it fair to speak of the method which Plato approved as 
 merely subjective (G. H. Lewes), in the face of his protest 
 
xiv (JKNERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 against the arbitrary manipulation of logical forms. His 
 metaphysical ardour docs not prevent him from blaming, but 
 rather constrains him to chastise those who in their frigid 
 ingenuity closed their eyes to the light of facts. His faith in 
 dialectic was, in other words, a faith in an order of the Uni- 
 verse which could be discovered by the patient use of genuine 
 inquiry, and by this alone. Although verification, in the 
 modern sense, was almost entirely absent from his method, 
 and his idea of " nature" was of course different from that 
 which later discoveries have made familiar ; yet the importance 
 which he attaches to the duty of following the real lines and 
 veins of things as they are, of " hitting the joint" in carving 
 the body of truth, and, what amounts to the same thing, the 
 stress which he lays on the distinction between an accidental 
 and a natural part (juepos and ei§os, a mere • portion find a 
 form h ), are indications of a general conception of Jhe-- task of 
 philosophy, Avhich is not to be confounded with the- '.German 
 notion of evolving thought from itself, or the Scotch method of 
 introspection in psychology. How facts are to be ascertained, 
 he has not determined ; but that the discoveries of the true phi- 
 losopher are matters of fact, and not mere notions of his own 
 mind, is an axiom without which much that he has written 
 would be unintelligible. But it is no less an axiom with him 
 that every true fact is also an idea, and were it not so would 
 be incognizable ; and that the only real concatenation of things 
 as they are, is that which dialectic gradually reveals to the 
 inquiring reason. Would Bacon have said otherwise, if "form'" 
 were substituted for "idea," and for "dialectic" the "interro- 
 gation of nature," a phrase which occurs almost verbatim in 
 Plato's Politicus ? Or will any modern reasoner dispute the 
 assertion that the Laws of Nature are only discoverable by 
 the right exercise of Mind ? 
 
 Plato's contribution to the positive science of Method was 
 indeed most simple, but, at that juncture in the history of 
 philosophy, of extreme value. Not to anticipate further here, 
 what must be described at length in examining the " Sophist," 
 his position is briefly this, that to divorce analysis from syn- 
 thesis, negation from affirmation, variety from unity, distinc- 
 tion from mutual relation, is fatal to the interests of inquiry. 
 
 h Compare Protag. 329 d. 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xv 
 
 "Cupid comes forth from an egg whereon Night hath 
 brooded, i.e. Knowledge is obtained by exclusions and nega- 
 tives." Yes, but Knowledge is affirmative, and the negations 
 arc seen in the result, only like the dark spaces on a polarized 
 spectrum, caused, as natural philosophers tell us, by the mu- 
 tual interferences of waves of light. 
 
 A contrast and a parallel, both taken from within the limits 
 of the Platonic dialogues, may fitly conclude this section. 
 
 a. When the peculiar form of dialectical exercise which at 
 first sight appears to reign in the Sophist and Statesman, 'is 
 compared with that of the more purely Socratic dialogues, 
 abstracting from the Pythagorean notion of bisection and the 
 Eleatic absoluteness of distinction, this mode of handling a 
 subject appears like an abridgment of Socratic procedure. 
 From long familiarity with the successive steps, the disciple is 
 ready for a more summary process, and a generalization and 
 distinction to which Socrates would have led the way through 
 a morning of ironical banter, is now disposed of by a few 
 rapid strokes. The argument from pleasure being the good 
 to science being virtue, which fills several pages of the Pro- 
 tagoras, would not have occupied ten lines of the Sophist. 
 And a further stage of this transition from conversational 
 profuseness towards scientific exactness and compression may 
 be observed in the latter of these two dialogues, where the 
 dichotomies, by which the art of weaving is defined, are enu- 
 merated in close succession in a single sentence ; a doubly 
 condensed form of intellectual nutriment, which proves too 
 strong for the respondent to assimilate at once. (Pol. 379 c — 
 380 b.) 
 
 /3. The parallel of the Philebus will be frequently suggested 
 as we proceed by many likenesses of style and structure. We 
 now confine ourselves to one point, which bears immediately 
 on the question of method. There is a passage near the 
 opening of that dialogue (p. 16) which distinguishes the right 
 from the wrong application of the eternal opposition and inter- 
 change of the One and the Many to the analysis and synthesis 
 of ideas. It is interesting to examine how far the directions 
 there given correspond to the procedure here employed. 
 
 " In every enquiry we should set before us one idea, which 
 we shall find, if we look for it, in the subject of our investiga- 
 
xvi GENERAL [NTRODUCTION. 
 
 tion." So in oacli of these inquiries the idea of Knowledge, or 
 of a person who knows, is immediately recognised and .selected 
 for analysis. "And in this one idea we must look for two, if 
 we can find two, or if not two, then the smallest number pos- 
 sible." This rule is also strictly followed, which is the more 
 noticeable, because no such principle is laid down in the Ph©- 
 drus. In the case of the seven "summa genera" of civil life 
 (Polit. 287 c), we are expressly told that it is impossible to 
 divide them into two parts; and it would be obviously difficult 
 to reduce the number, except by an abscissio infiniti, which 
 would be out of place, because some of the kinds which arc 
 in direct competition with the kingly art would then be left 
 undefined. " We must then proceed to subdivide these units, 
 until we see, not only that the one idea is both one and many, 
 but also how many are its real subdivisions." In the Sophist 
 and Politicus, as well as in the Pha3drus, the notion of the 
 aTfjiriTov eTSos, or species infima, has an important place (cf. 
 Soph. 289 d), and the danger of passing at once from the 
 highest generality to the lowest specialty is exemplified (e. g. 
 Polit. 263). 
 
 " In like manner, when one is compelled to start from the 
 indefinite (in cases where there is not immediately apparent a 
 single comprehensive idea), he ought not all at once to spring 
 from infinity to unity, but should find a number in the undis- 
 tinguished mass, and so proceed from number to number 
 until he reaches unity." (Phil. 18 b.) It is more difficult to 
 prove that this precept is exactly obeyed. But the cautious 
 spirit thus enjoined may be illustrated from several instances 
 of gradual generalization, as where the speakers cry a halt 
 to count up the number of forms in Avhich the Sophist has 
 appeared, previous to one of these being selected as the most 
 universally applicable (Soph. 231 d) ; or where from the 
 narrower generalization, " nurture of men," they pass on to 
 the wider conception of "care or superintendence of men" 
 (Polit. 275) ; or where from the comparison of the king and 
 the weaver (implying a provisional generalization) is evolved 
 the more general notion of an art of combination (auyKptn/o/) 
 (lb. 282 b). 
 
 § 5. The forms of Sameness and Difference appear in the 
 Sophist amongst the five kinds or forms which are selected 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. x\ii 
 
 for examination as being the "greatest," or the most universal. 
 " Being," the highest of all, was found to embrace the oppo- 
 site principles of " motion/'' the essence of the materialist, and 
 "rest," that of the idealist philosopher. On comparing these 
 three " kinds," each is seen to have sameness and difference, — 
 to be the same with itself, different from the other two. And 
 these predicates of sameness and difference are found to be 
 no less universally applicable than the form of Being. Thus 
 Being, Sameness, and Difference, to use Aristotelian language, 
 are universal predicaments, or categories. Everything, of 
 which we can speak, exists, is the same in one relation, different 
 in others, and is either at rest or in motion or both in different 
 ways. " Number" is incidentally mentioned in the same dia- 
 logue (238 b) as being also an inseparable attribute of every 
 possible term. 
 
 Again, in the latter part of the Politicus, there is an enume- 
 ration of seven kinds, as an ultimate division of the industries 
 which are the helpers of the ruling power in a state. These 
 are — raw-material, instruments, reservoirs, vehicles, cover- 
 ings, amusements, food. To these summa genera of human 
 labour is added the work of servants of every sort. And it 
 is not obscurely implied, that with the addition of the royal 
 science as a moving and regulating cause, this enumeration 
 affords an exhaustive analysis of human activity. Thus in both 
 dialogues there is seen a tendency to select certain natures or 
 ideas as being the highest and most comprehensive, either of 
 all ideas, or of the ideas belonging to a particular subject. 
 
 If we except the Tima^us, where something similar is observ- 
 able in the constitution of the Psychical Substance (p. 35) and 
 in the five elements, which however are not viewed as by any 
 means ultimate 1 , the only other dialogue where there is a 
 similar enumeration of categories is the Philebus, where Being 
 is analyzed into Limit, the Unlimited, their union, and the 
 cause of this ; and the end of Being, or the good, is embraced 
 in five kinds, Measure, Symmetry, Reality, Mind, and Pleasure. 
 An approach, however, to a similar notion may be traced in 
 two places of the Thesetetus : first, where the ideas selected 
 as the undoubted objects of pure mind are Being, Not-Being, 
 
 1 Tim. 48 b : ouS' iv a-uWaPrjs slSeai povov. A remarkable anticipation of 
 modem chemistry. 
 
 d 
 
xviii GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Sameness and Difference, Likeness and Unlikcness, and Num- 
 ber J; and again, where in the "aviary" of tbe mind, wbile 
 most of tbo " birds" or knowledges are collected in larger or 
 smaller groups, a few arc seen careering through every part. 
 (ThesBt. 197 c.) 
 
 Tbis peculiarity of these three dialogues, Pbilebus, Sophista, 
 PoliticuSj affords a point of comparison or rather of approxi- 
 mation between Plato and Aristotle. The only previous 
 attempt at ultimate classification had been the oworoixiai of 
 tbe Pythagoreans, and in the greater number of Plato's dia- 
 logues, even where ideas (or forms) are mentioned, there is no 
 selection of a certain number as supreme and as embracing all 
 others, except partially in the case of moral ideas. Even 
 when the form of good is described in the Republic as surpass- 
 ing in glory and dignity the idea of Being, this saying has 
 rather a cosmological and ethical than a logical or metaphy- 
 sical meaning. But here not only is the word yiios for the 
 first time k employed in the technical sense, but each of the 
 terms so described is viewed as a universal, containing a 
 variety of species, and obtained by a process of induction 
 (aw ay cay i]. See Phileb. p. 25) ; and each enumeration is, for 
 the time being, and in relation to the particular question raised, 
 regarded as ultimate. This is therefore a nearer approach to 
 a doctrine of categories than the casual reference to quantity 
 (Soph. 245 d, Phileb. 24 c), quality (Rep. 4, 438 b, Theset. 
 182 b), relation (Soph. 255 c, Phil. 51 c), action and passion 
 (Theset. and Soph.), in scattered passages. 
 
 But the categories of Plato are not connected with the theory 
 of Predication, towards which, as appears even from Soph. 
 261 c, Plato had made but little progress. Even those of the 
 " Sophist" are rather ontological than logical, and are more 
 nearly analogous to the " four causes" of the Metaphysics : 
 denoting, to use a convenient distinction of Plotinus, rather 
 the elements than the kinds of Being. And he is less bound 
 than Aristotle to his own forms of thought. The enumeration 
 is in no two places the same. In the highest region of dia- 
 lectic Plato still asserts the freedom of Mind. He "stands 
 
 J Theset. 185 d. Compare Parrnenides, p. 129 e, where Eest and Motion are 
 added to these. 
 
 k The only exception is in Phasdrus, 271 b. 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. my 
 
 behind" the forms which ho has invented to express what 
 cannot be fully expressed, the electric play of thought. Col- 
 lection and distinction, union and division, finite and infinite, 
 same and other, one and many, Being and Not-Being, are 
 various names for the two poles on whose attraction and repul- 
 sion depend the " high-strung harmonies'" of the ideal world. 
 
 § 6. Not less peculiar than the method of these dialogues 
 is their structure, style, and diction, which, however, receive 
 considerable illustration from the Philebus, Timaeus, and Laws. 
 
 To take first what is most obvious, Socrates is no longer the 
 chief speaker. A stranger from Elea, with whom Theodoras, 
 Theaetetus, and the younger Socrates have been conversing, 
 accompanies them to the place of meeting, where they are 
 expected by Socrates; who, with his accustomed pertinacious 
 politeness, brings on a conversation, but with the exception of 
 a few words when there is a change of subject, is silent for 
 the remainder of the morning. In this respect this pair of 
 dialogues is like the Parmenides, Timaeus, and Critias, and 
 resembles the two last named also in another equally external 
 point, namely, that each pair form the middle part of an 
 unfinished tetralogy. Plato has only twice thus connected 
 dialogues in a series. The Theaetetus, Sophist, Statesman, 
 and Philosopher, are in this the counterpart of the Republic, 
 Timaeus, Critias, and Hermocrates. 
 
 The retirement of Socrates, however, though in keeping 
 with, will not account for, the other peculiarities of which we 
 are now to speak. For the few words assigned to him at the 
 beginning partake of the general change of tone. Nor can this 
 be ascribed to the subject ; for the subjects of either dialogue, 
 though related to each other, are wholly distinct. 
 
 Every reader of Plato must have felt a difference in passing 
 from the Republic or Phaedrus to the Sophist and Politicus ; 
 or, may it not be added? to the Philebus or the Laws. He is 
 like one who, after walking with a gifted friend in town and 
 country, and hearing him converse with all men, sits down to 
 listen to a lecture from the same person. There is an air of 
 self-imposed restraint, at the first glance distinguishable from 
 the absolute conversational freedom of the Gorgias, a didactic 
 tone, unlike the Socratic dissimulation of knowledge, a vein 
 of refined and biting satire, which may be contrasted as well 
 
 d2 
 
xx (JKNERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 as compared with the naive and playful humour of the Phsedrufl 
 or Charmides. As the student proceeds, he is struck by the 
 more elaborate, though not more regular conformation of the 
 periods, by the more frequent, almost monotonous recurrence 
 of a certain rhythmical cadence, which he may have noticed 
 here and there in the Phaedrus, Republic, and Thcsetetus 1 , by 
 the precision of manner into which the Socratic urbanity has 
 been transformed. And if he examines more minutely into 
 the diction, he will find that the natural order is more often 
 inverted than in the dialogues with which he is familiar, and 
 that a greater fondness is shewn for unusual words, both 
 poetical and technical, than in any dialogue except the Phas- 
 drus, Republic, Timaeus, and Laws. In some respects the 
 language approaches to that of tragedy, in others to the 
 formality of an Aristotelian treatise. 
 
 (i) To dwell a little more at length on some of these points : 
 and first, on the more didactic and systematic manner of the con- 
 versation. Nothing can exceed the courtesy and modesty both 
 of Socrates and the Stranger in the opening scene, but when 
 the Eleatic guest and his respondent have once crossed blades, 
 he deals with him, not without pleasantry, but with a becoming 
 degree of gravity, and secundum artem. There are no sallies, 
 like those of Glaucon in the Republic, no sudden bursts of 
 eloquence, as in the Phaedrus. With a tone of mild authority 
 the philosopher, for the edification of the bystanders, guides 
 his pupil by a path familiar to himself to conclusions which 
 he foreknows. He acknowledges from the first that he is 
 thoroughly conversant with the whole subject (Sia/oj/coeVcu ye 
 (f)r]<Tiv Ikcuj&s koX ovk aixvi]ixov€iv), and warns his new acquaint- 
 ances that the argument will be a long one. 
 
 The peculiarity in question is obviously shared by the Par- 
 menides ; less obviously, though still perceptibly, by the 
 Thesetetus. It is also observable in the Philebus, Timasus, 
 and Laws. 
 
 The Philebus has certainly more of the well-known playful- 
 ness and familiarity of Socratic talk, more light and shade, 
 and, in parts, more dramatic liveliness. The fine contrast, 
 for example, between the eager Protarchus and the petulant 
 
 1 See also the myth in the Protagoras. 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xxi 
 
 Philebus is unlike the almost featureless masks of the facile 
 respondents in these dialogues. But such lighter elements are 
 controlled by a certain degree of formality, and by the con- 
 sciousness of method. The speakers are playing at a ''labo- 
 rious game "V to which they are evidently not unaccustomed, 
 and which proceeds according to certain rules. We are not in 
 the market-place, or the house of Callias, but in the groves of 
 Academe. And though the "boys" are not quite so tractable 
 as Thesetetus, Socrates guides them by a regularly intricate 
 road to a definite end, which has a positive as well as a nega- 
 tive import. The structure of the Philebus is in many ways 
 nearer to the Sophist than that of either is to any other 
 writing. As the ideal pretender is chased through the one 
 dialogue, so the idea of pleasure, more or less personified, is 
 hunted down in the other. The difficulties which arise in both 
 are solved by means of a harmony of ideas (called in the Phi- 
 lebus Koaixos rts arra/jLaTos, a "bodiless creation"). In both, the 
 transitions (fxeTafiaaeis) of the argument are only surpassed in 
 dialectical subtilty by the Theaetetus. Both account for false- 
 hood by a similar analysis of mental states ; both examine 
 contemporary philosophers as diviners of that which they do 
 not clearly know. In both, higher subjects are discussed than 
 that proposed at the outset, which is accordingly thrust down, 
 in both by a similar method of divisions, to the lowest place in 
 the scale of knowledge or of being. In some of these respects 
 the Politicus also presents some analogy to the Philebus ; and 
 they resemble each other in the importance which they both 
 attach to the philosophy of Measure. On the whole, the style 
 of the Philebus may be described as intermediate between that 
 of the Republic and that of the Sophist. That of the Sophist 
 and Politicus, again, is intermediate between the Philebus and 
 the Timseus and Laws. In these the gravity of tone already 
 noticed is deepened into solemnity, and becomes the pervading 
 characteristic. The keen though suppressed irony of the So- 
 phist and Politicus, directed not towards the respondent, but 
 against mankind, is here softened (like wine becoming first 
 austere, then mellow), and either disappears, or is replaced by 
 grave and gentle reflections on human nothingness. The 
 
 m Parm. 137 b'- frpayfiaretwdtj irctiSiav iraifav. 
 
xxii GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 bitterness of a mind which had man)' thoughts which could 
 not be realized, now takes tlio sober colouring of an eye 
 
 "That hath kept watch o'er man's mortality ;" 
 
 and the didactic manner of the chief speaker is more decided. 
 There is the most perfect modesty, but no dissimulation of 
 knowledge. The leader of the conversation speaks with an 
 authority to which the rest defer. The results, though still 
 only approximate, arc in the highest degree positive, and the 
 method is throughout constructive. The thoughts of a life- 
 time had assumed something like a permanent shape : and 
 they were the writer's own. They were still living thoughts, 
 and could give a reason of themselves; but they no longer 
 needed the art of Socrates to bring them into being. Cicero 
 was substantially if not literally right in assuming the Athenian 
 Stranger in the Laws to be Plato himself. 
 
 (2) The loss of conversational freedom and liveliness is 
 accompanied by a corresponding decline of poetical grace and 
 power. The fire of enthusiasm is not extinct by any means, 
 but is concentrated on a few great objects (Dialectic, Being, 
 the Philosopher, the creation and preservation of the universe 
 by God), and is less ready to light up with a spontaneous glow 
 every new world of imagination. The language is less instinct 
 with harmonious energy. The fondness for poetic words is of 
 the kind which belongs rather to a learned rhetoric than to 
 poetry. The genius loci, so powerful in the Phaedrus, is here 
 forgotten. The Eleatic Stranger is like the Sophist he de- 
 scribes, whose " sense is shut" to everything but the dry light 
 of reason. Speaking in a palaestra, he alludes in the most 
 distant and general way, when the topic is suggested by his 
 argument, to " certain exercises in which men are trained in 
 groups at Athens and elsewhere." (Polit. 294 d.) Speaking at 
 the time when Athens was ringing with the trial of Socrates, 
 he never once alludes to a matter so sublunary. Indeed he 
 expressly disowns any intention of giving pleasure, and lays 
 down the principle that the standard by which the propor- 
 tions of an argument are to be judged is not that of artistic 
 symmetry. (lb. 286 d.) Such was not the spirit of the pre- 
 cept that " an argument must be like the picture of a living 
 creature, having head and feet and every member drawn in 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xxiii 
 
 seemly proportion to each other and the whole. " (Phsedr. 
 364 c.) It has been remarked that the allusions to previous 
 writings, such as the Republic, which occur in the Laws, are 
 unlike the maimer of the earlier dialogues, where every 
 touch is in perfect dramatic keeping. Now, not to mention 
 the manifest allusion to the Parmcnides in Soph. 217 c (more 
 pointed than in Theset. 183 e), the direct reference to the 
 argument of the " Sophist" in Polit. 284 b (Kadanzp ev to> 
 ao<pL(TTf] TTpoarjvayKacraixev tlvai to [xrj oV), though not violating 
 propriety, because the company is unchanged, has more of a 
 literary than a dramatic turn, and is more in the manner of 
 a treatise than of a dialogue. And this is still more obviously 
 the case in Soph. 253 c, where the Stranger quotes the lan- 
 guage of a conversation at which he had not been present. 
 (Theset. 172 d.) 
 
 (3) Yet although there is less of spontaneous movement and 
 artistic lightness of structure than in some other dialogues, there 
 is more appearance of studied order and arrangement. Thus 
 a reason is given for the introduction of the example of the 
 fisherman in the Sophist, and the example of the weaver in 
 the Politicus occasions an explanation of the use and meaning 
 of example as an instrument of thought. And in making the 
 transition from the dichotomies to the myth in the same 
 dialogue, the Stranger gives due notice of the change, and 
 anticipates the course to be taken when they return from this 
 digression. The "preludes" and "recapitulations" of which 
 the Phaedrus speaks so disdainfully are now recommended 
 with some emphasis by Plato. This avowedly conscious and 
 studied arrangement of the parts of a discourse is still more 
 noticeable in the early books of the Laws, where, to explain 
 the tediousness of the preliminary discussion, the speaker says 
 (1, 638 e) that he is endeavouring to make apparent the right 
 method to be pursued in all such arguments. He is in fact, 
 like the Stranger in the Politicus, giving an Example of 
 Example. Such carefulness about the form of a writing, at a 
 time when the form was really becoming less perfect, and also 
 the composition of great works, and the connexion of succes- 
 sive pieces in a series, may be thought to indicate a different 
 sense of the value of books from that expressed in a well- 
 known passage of the Phaedrus. And this suspicion is con- 
 
xxiv GENERAL [NTRODUCTION. 
 
 firmed by a striking expression in the Laws, where the chief 
 speaker, reviewing the conversation which they had held since 
 dawn, maintains that no better education could be devised for 
 youth, than to learn by heart this new kind of poetry, which 
 he and his companions have poured forth, "not unaccompanied 
 with airs from Heaven." (Legg. 7, 81 j c.) 
 
 § 7- (Avvano 8' dv tis, el /3ov\olto, nal ras vnb rov Ylkdrojvos 
 6 vo p:a<T 6 e [eras rey^vas ravras tTTapiQjxelv, kol ra ovv avrais ovop.ara, 
 etre cnrovha(m> e^pT/ro toi? 6vop,acnv etVe koX jxtj. Aeyco be, Ota to 
 ev kvioLs tS)v ovop.drcav fiiaiorepov xPWdai. Pollux, Onomasticon, 
 VIII. 33, p. 206, 7.) 
 
 More palpable, though not more real, than these general 
 nuances of style, are certain peculiarities of diction. Of these 
 perhaps the most obvious to a cursory reader is the use of 
 technical expressions. Mr. Cope has well observed, in the 
 Preface to his translation of the Gorgias, that one of the 
 most striking peculiarities of Plato's philosophical writings is 
 the almost entire absence of any scientific terminology. He 
 adds, that "with the exception of one or two peculiar terms, 
 such as etSos or Ibea and SiaAe/cn/cr/, and the special appro- 
 priation of btdvoia and dvpoeibes in the Republic, and possibly 
 one or two others, Plato's philosophy is absolutely devoid of 
 any technical phraseology." 
 
 This remark applies with perfect truth to the Gorgias, Pro- 
 tagoras, Phaedo, and most other dialogues. The technicalities 
 which occur in the Phsedrus (except biaXeKriKos, awayeayi], 
 bimpeais) are quoted with contempt. But the Thesetetus 
 already bears the marks of an opposite tendency, which 
 becomes more decided in the Philebus, Sophist, and Politicus. 
 Each theory advanced in the Thegetetus is characterized by 
 an incipient terminology, which, like the theories themselves, 
 is not entirely set aside. Thus to express the doctrine of 
 Sense we have klvtjctls, noiovv, rrda^ov, aloOrjcns, alaQrvrov, cpopa, 
 7ToV arret, aladavop.eva, alaOrjrris, Kptr-qpLov, rb alo-da.v6p.evov, ttoi- 
 6tt]s, each having a definite meaning required by the theory ; 
 and two of them, alaOrjrrjs and ttchot^s, being evidently new- 
 fangled words. Other terms of the same kind which are pro- 
 duced in the later phases of the discussion are eKp.ayelov, p.vr]- 
 p.e'iov, emcrr-tjprjv eyziv, KenrrjaOaL, ersioTy\rd, aroL^e'iov, crvXka^r}, 
 hiacpoporrjs. There are words of a more general character, 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xxv 
 
 such as araXaftelv, 'to resume,' hiopi(zcr6ai, 'to distinguish/ 
 which receive a preciscness of meaning from familiar use which 
 they could not have had in ordinary speaking or writing. It 
 is true that even Plato's technicalities are fresh from the mint ; 
 they retain the gloss of novelty, and the hues of life. But no 
 student of these dialogues can doubt that there was floating 
 before him the conception of a scientific language, based on 
 dialectic, which should express more perfectly than they were 
 known to the first name-giver the true sections and combina- 
 tions of things. The Heracliteans were indeed ridiculed in the 
 Thea3tetus (183 b), because their theory confounded the ordi- 
 nary use of speech : but even this ridicule shews that the 
 notion of a philosophic vocabulary was already there. (Cf. 
 ib. 166 b.) And in defence of one of the strangest of his 
 coinages (Sofo/u/xquKTj), towards the conclusion of the Sophist, 
 the Stranger gravely says that for want of the power of 
 dividing "kinds" into their "forms" the vocabulary of the 
 ancients was most defective. (Compare Cratylus, 436-439.) 
 Yet he is careful to vary his new-made words, so as to avoid 
 the hearer's being enslaved to them, and commends the youth 
 with whom he converses for not setting too high a value on 
 the choice of a name. (KaA<3? ye,a> Sajjcpares, k&v bia4>v\a£ri$ 
 to [xr) crnovbafav k-nl tols ovoixam, Trkovcn<oTepos els to yrjpas 
 ava<pavr}o-ei cppovriaeas. Polit. 261 e.) Thus it is evident that 
 the invention of new terms was intended to enrich language, 
 and not to limit thought. 
 
 Of the words in these dialogues which are either new or 
 receive a distinctly new significance, there are many which 
 Plato does not use again ; but there are others which are 
 found to recur, especially in the Laws. The following are not 
 used again by Plato : — 
 
 Soph. — * ayopacris, abiavorjTos, * apakXrjTLKOs, * avbpa,T>obi.(TTL- 
 kos, t avOpisbTiiKos, * av6p(oiro6r)pla, f airaTrjTiKos (Xen.), * aenra- 
 \l€vtlk6$, ^avToirtokiKos, avTovpyitcos (M. Anton.), * fiakavevTiKoSj 
 * 8r;/xoAoytKOs, * ho£op.i[ir)Tr]s , * Sojfo/xi/u^u/cds, * So£o7rcu8et>n/cos, 
 bcoprjTLKOS (Philo.), bcopo<popLKos (Ael.), * elbaiXoTTouKos, * dbcoXo- 
 7roids, * dbcoXovpyLKOS, * evavTioiroLoXoyinos, f ZiubeLKTiKos, * kpno- 
 QrjpiKOS, * (<Ao6r]p(.a, *fao9r]pLK.6s, *7]bvvTiK6s, *i]\j.spody}piK6s } *6av- 
 
 * aira£ \eyofxeva. + Used by Aristotle. The places out of Plato where 
 
 the rest occur are chiefly in later Greek. 
 
 e 
 
xxvi GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 fxa(o-?)TOTTOiiKo's, ^IbtuOiipevTiKos, * IhioOrjpla, | to-ropi/c^s, tK°^ aoTl - 
 
 KCn 1 , f KTTjTLKOi, * /J.a0r]lXaTO7Ta>\lKU<i, ■)• IX€Ta(3Xl]TlKOi, ^ VZVCTTIKOS, 
 
 * vo[XL(T[xaToiTU)\tKus, oi\acoriKo\", oZk€TI/COS, * upOuXoyia,* Tit(fiOr\pia, 
 * TTtfrOiipiKus, 77 lOavovpyt.KU'i, f ttX^ktiku^, * TTpoaop.LXrjTLKOS, * 7rvp- 
 eun/c?/, ttu)\titik6s, * o"7royytoTtKos, f (Twe^tta, Tpiohovria, tyav- 
 tckttikos, * (pOapLCTTiKos, * x €t P &)rtK0 ' s ? * yjJr}p.a.To<pQopu<.6s } * \/feu- 
 8oupyos, * \l/v^ep.TJopiKO'i. 
 
 Polit. — * ayeAaioKo/j.iK(fc, * dyeAaiorpocpia, * ayeXaioTpcxpinos, 
 f aKtpacrTOs, f aneparos, f aKe'pco?, aKeoTiK?;, * avOpw-ovo/MKos., 
 fapxirzKToviKos, &crTpo<pos ( = without a twist), furp?i7os, *aiiTe7U- 
 tcikt?/s, * aiircTTtraKTtKo's, yvaxm.KOS, * yop$amKo's, * Sepparovpyi- 
 koSj f btaKooXvTLKos, * k-ni6r]p,arovpyia, f €7np.eXrjTLKos (Xcn.), e7Tt- 
 orau/co's, f k-niTaKTiKos, f epyaoriKo's, * zvQvnXoKta, * faoyevris, 
 (a)OTpo<p(a, faoTpcxpiKos (Clem. Alex.), fflpejrraos, i8ioyei;7?s, * 1810- 
 yovCa, i5to'r7js, *lbLOTp6(pos (Ar. uses lbtorpo(pos), * IpanovpytKcfc, 
 ^l-niroipopftia, ^iTnrcxpopfios, KeXtvariKos (Plut.), * Kepta-annos, Krj- 
 Pvklkos (Clem. Alex.), * Koivoyem}?, * Koivoyovla, * KOLVorpcxpLKos, 
 t KplTLKOS, * KpOKOVr)TlKOS, * p.ay€VTlKOS, * pt-ovorpocpCa, * vrjarutds, 
 
 vop.€VTiKos, wfAcptvTrjs ( = one who unites in marriages), *£ayTi- 
 kos, t iqpofiaTiKos, ^^rjpoTpocpiKos, *TTe(ovopuK.6s, 7tepLJ3kr)p.a, 7T€pi- 
 Kakvp.p.a, t TrtkqTLKOSj t ttAuptikos, * irpo^XrjpLaTovpyLKOs, TrpuTO- 
 yevrjs, * TTT€po<pvq<i, pvOpuKos (Plut.), a-iToupyo's', crre/cn/co's, <nr]p.o- 
 
 VOVTjTlKOS, * <TTllpLOVO<pVriS, * CTTptTITlKOS, (TVyKpiTLKOS, (TVpLTrXeKTLKOS, 
 
 avvOeTiKos, * avviKpavcns, avarpocp-q (abstract), raAacriovpyiKos, 
 Tidacreia, f Tpijaris, rprjTos, rpi\ivos } * vyporpocptKOS, "* (pAoiori/ccfc, 
 (ppdyp.a, xaAKoruTiiK??. 
 
 Soph. Polit. — * apLcpiafiriTriTiKos, avTOTrwXyjs, ■*" y(/<)z>a<pei>riKO$. 
 
 The following are found in other dialogues : — 
 
 * ayKLarpevTLKOs (Soph., * ayxiaTpda Legg.), aypapLparos (Po- 
 lit. Tim. Critias), dyooznoriK?; (Soph. Legg.), apLvvrfpLos (Polit. 
 Legg.), /3ta<TTt/cos (Soph. Legg.), SiaAirriKo? (Poht. Tim.), Sofo- 
 <ro<pia (Soph. Phil.), etKaortKTj (Soph. Legg.), dpoovLnos (Soph. 
 Legg.), * kvvypoQripiKos (Soph., * ivvypoOrjpevT^s Legg.), f fV 
 Spo? (Soph. Polit. Tim. Legg.), f nadaprLKos (Soph. Tim.), * j>ov- 
 6zt7]tlk6s (Soph. Legg.), opvLdevTcnos (Soph., dpvidevTrjs Legg.), 
 iraiyviov (Polit. Legg.), 7rAeKUKo? (Polit. Legg.), t^Ken-aa-fid (Po- 
 lit. Legg.), oracriaoTUos (Polit., oracrtcoreta Legg.), CTtyacrpia 
 (Polit. Tim. Critias), f avyKpurLs (Soph. Phil. Tim. Legg.), <pap- 
 IxaKOTToa-ia (Soph. Legg.). 
 
 Besides this class of words, whose use is thus shewn to be 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xxvii 
 
 not wholly confined to the two dialogues, thcro may be ob- 
 served in them two other kinds of a language approaching 
 technical, which are nearly related to each other : terms ex- 
 pressing the operations of dialectic, and words connected with 
 the mathematical and physical sciences. 
 
 a. Of the former sort are Soph. — avrCOecris, (Wfoeijuai, diro- 
 TeXevTrjais, * acrvvvovs, SmtAo't/, ZvavnoXoyia, p.aKpoXoyos, 7rpop.e- 
 Aer<3, f (pdcrts. Polit. — /3e/3aioocris, (karroo, f biovop.d(a>, 8ix«t w j 
 f bixoTop,S>, inrpoTTrj (tov Xoyov), kvdpyeia (met. from painting), 
 Ae7rrovpy<3, * p.eaoTop.S>, 6vop.aaCa, Tra\4(t)s, f irpoa-aTro^aiVco, av- 
 vdpi(p(i). Soph. Polit. — <TWT€pLVG> ( = assist in dividing). And, 
 recurring elsewhere in Plato, — d-nopLepLfa (Polit. Legg.), ano- 
 (tx^(>> (Polit. Legg.), ta0-X taTO? (Soph. Tim.), aropo? (Soph., 
 cf. arpjyros Pha3dr.), ye'i-os (as a metaphysical term, Parm. 
 Soph. Polit. Phil. Tim. Legg., and once in Phaedr.), *yrw- 
 piens (Polit. Legg.), beapios (a bond uniting ideas, Soph. 
 Polit. Phil. Parm. Tim. Legg.), bidyvaxns (Soph. Legg.), 8ta- 
 XoyiCppLcu (Soph. Phil. Tim.), 8iapepA>&> (Polit. Phil. Legg.), 
 
 * biav6r](n<s (Polit. Tim. Legg.), *biat:opG> (to raise a difficulty, 
 Soph. Tim. Legg.), biaKpifioXoyovp\ai (Soph. Tim.), 8taxwpt'(a> 
 (Polit. Phil. Tim.), | &">p«rpos (Polit. Tim.), eKKptva (Polit. 
 Legg.), emvepLGd (Polit. Legg.), fpe'0e£ts (Soph. Parm.), pep^co 
 (Soph. Polit. Parm. Tim.), pepfc (Soph. Legg.), -napoo vvpnov 
 (Soph. Legg.), Ttpoop.oXoyovp.ai (Soph. Tim.), iipocrKoiva>v(a 
 (Soph. Legg.), a-vyKe(pa\aiovp:aL (Soph. Phil.), f avvoXos (Soph. 
 Polit. Legg.), * o~vvop.oXoy(.a (Soph. Legg.), o-xtfa (Soph. Polit. 
 Phil. Tim.), Top.r\ (metaphorical, Soph. Polit. Tim. Legg.). 
 
 /3. Words expressing physical and mathematical conceptions : 
 Soph. — fipaTToo, biaKivG> (? 226 b), TropKos, f TrXaaTos. Polit. — 
 
 * depatperos, yvd\j/is, evrJTptos, tyrjo-Ls, koXXt)t6$, * /cpoKcoS???, f pe- 
 raXXevco, vico, vr\6(a, vr\p.a, * ^airrjs, 7rAef is, o-ndprov, * avyKep- 
 K[((a. Recurring — dp,€rpo$ (Soph. Phil. Tim. Legg.), avanv- 
 kXt](tls (Polit. dvaKVK.Xovp.ai Tim.), avaroXi] (Polit. Legg.), 
 dveiXCTTu (Phileb., avetXigts Polit.), dirXavijs (Polit. Tim. Legg.), 
 f a^ea-ts (Polit. Legg.), /3po'xos (Soph. Critias), fyivzem (of 
 production in general, Soph. Polit. Phil. Tim. Legg.), yvp.va- 
 0-7779 (Polit. Legg., 7rai.boTpi[3r}s is the usual word in Plato), 
 t§ia0eo-is (Soph. Phil. Tim. Legg.), biaOpavw (Soph. Tim.), 
 bidden? (Soph. Phil. Tim. Legg.), ^buqOziv (Soph. Tim.), 
 
 * bpvorop.iK'q (Polit., * bpvorop.(a Legg.), Z , nio-K6vd(op,ai (Polit. 
 
xxviii GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Legg.), tTTcairevOG) (Polit. Legg.), cvkvkXos (.Soph., quotation 
 from Parm., Tim.), IcrorraX'ks (Soph, quotation from Parm., 
 Tim.), KaraK(fo-jU?7<ns (Polit. Tim.), KaraOpavo) (Polit. Tim.), 
 *nvK\r)<ns (Polit. Tim.), nvpros (Soph. Tim. Lcgg.), £atv<i> 
 (Soph. Polit. Lcgg.), ixirprja- is (Polit. Legg.), ^erp?jr6s (Polit. 
 Lcgg.), irapak\a£t$ (Polit. Tim.), Trapd(j)opos (Soph. Lcgg., 
 irapacpopoTrjs Tim.), 7n/£is (Polit. Phil.), 7rAdros (the dimension 
 of breadth, Soph. Polit. Critias, Lcgg.), 7r\eyp.a (Soph. Polit. 
 Tim. Lcgg.), rrpofBoXi] (Polit. Tim. Lcgg.), * patyr] (Polit. Tim.), 
 avyxpaaLs (Polit. Phil.), avyKpiais (Soph. Phil. Tim. Lcgg.), 
 avp.pu£is (Soph. Polit. Phil. Tim. Legg.), o-vixtti\G> (Polit. 
 Tim.), * 0-vpnrobrjyovp.ai (Polit., irobriye'iv Legg.), avp.(pvi]S (Soph. 
 Tim. Legg.), ovvv(palva> (Polit. Tim.), aa>p.a, " body in gene- 
 ral,'^ to crwjuaroetSes (Soph. Phil. Tim. Legg. 896), ttjktos 
 (Soph. Critias), TpoiTij, as an astronomical term (Polit. Tim. 
 Legg.), vkrjV (Polit. Phil. Tim. Critias, Legg.), vitepoyj\ (Polit. 
 Legg.), vcprj (Polit. Legg.). 
 
 y. As the terms just enumerated betray Plato's love for 
 those physical pursuits which were rejected by Socrates, so 
 the new word aOeorrjs, which occurs only in the Politicus and 
 Laws in all Greek literature before the death of Plato (unless 
 we must add the seventh Platonic Epistle), affords an indi- 
 cation of his tendency to religious thought. And it is a fact 
 worth noticing in this connexion that the word ayios is con- 
 fined to the Sophist, Critias, and Laws, amongst the Platonic 
 writings, and ol KpeCrroves as a euphemism for ol 6eoC to Soph. 
 216 b, Epist. 7, 326 e. 
 
 Perhaps the notion of technical language (voces artis) may 
 be thought to be unduly stretched in being extended to some 
 of the words under the last two headings. But in whatever 
 way they are described they are equally suitable to be adduced 
 in the present section, whose object is to define and illus- 
 trate peculiarities of diction. There remain to be noticed 
 words borrowed from the poets, and especially from the trage- 
 dians : respecting which it may be observed that the affecta- 
 tion of unusual phrases, which appears in the Phaedrus as the 
 result of a half playful dithyrambic and epic fervour, at which 
 
 p The introduction of this word is TrpooToyevh elSos in the Politicus is 
 interesting in connexion with Ari- one of the few anticipations in 
 stotle's Material Cause, of which the Plato. 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xxix 
 
 Socrates himself wonders, is here interwoven with grave and 
 unimpassioncd talk, giving a tone of sustained dignity to the 
 style. To this class (8) belong : — 
 
 Soph. — avT(<TTaOp:os, a^evos, airpa^ia, ap^aioirpeTri'is, u<(>0ey- 
 ktos, bvcreib/js, eia 8?/, davcFTepov, ^KaOibpvGO, piaXOaK&s, vcIkos 
 (quoted from Emped.), 6Xkt6t]p6s, pvfxrj, v\}/66€v. 
 
 Polit. — a\e£r]Ti]pios (Xen.), &Xis (Xen.), airaypm (Thcophr.), 
 aTroAe/xa)? ^X ( - lv ) a^ 1 " 7 ?^ *apyvpap.oi[S6s (cf. xP urra M ol /3os), fior)- 
 Xcltt]?, (3ov(pop(36s, yereiw, bioiypa, e^avOco, evyi'oocrros, evKpiro?, 
 %(pebpo$, Otacros, K&Tayp,a, Kepaa<popos, p,zXaivecrdai, vop.^vu> ) 
 oirXicrpLa, napeia, itepLamij, TToXvirXavijs, 7rpo<T(p6eyyop:ai, crvvrpi^. 
 Under this head also might have been classed aorpcxpos and 
 vvpLcpevTiqs. 
 
 Soph. Polit. — a-neprip,6o). 
 
 'Ay?/pcos (Pol. Phil. Tim. Legg.), ad&os (Soph. Legg.), avrd- 
 £ios (Polit. Legg., in the former with tacit reference to the 
 line of Homer which is quoted in Symp. 214 b), a7rAeros 
 (Soph. Legg.), yeirovQ (Polit. Legg.), beo-noris (Polit. Tim. 
 Legg.), StaXayxava) (Polit. Oritias), bienrepao) (Soph. Tim.), 
 e7revx°M at (Soph. Critia. Legg.), sv(ovvp,os ( = of auspicious 
 name (Pind.), (Polit. Legg.), fjavxaios (Polit. Legg.), KpT/m's 
 (Polit. Legg.), Kpvcpcuos (Soph. Tim.), ^/xe'xptTrep (Soph. Polit. 
 Phileb.), £ivws (Zevs) (Soph. Legg.), ^oir-pirep (Soph. Tim. 
 Legg.), ^TrapLirav (Polit. Tim. Legg.), irapafypoavvr] (Soph. 
 Phileb. ?, irapafyptov Legg.), (p?j) irXaaT&s (Soph. Legg.), 
 ttoXlos (Polit. Parm. Tim.), oreAAo^cu (Soph. Phileb. Legg.), 
 f a-vvbpop.o's (Polit. Legg.), f <rvvvop.o$ (Polit. Tim. Critia. Legg.), 
 ^crvvTpocpos (Polit. Legg.), TpvnXovs (Polit. Tim. Legg.), x e P- 
 <tcuos (Soph. Tim. Legg.). Next to which, for convenience 
 sake, may be classed some unusual compounds and derivatives 
 which have a similar rhetorical effect (e) : — 
 
 Soph. — *aTTopapTvpop:ai, cbo'ppvycns, *bva6ijpevTOs, f eTraXXa&s, 
 €VT]vCo}s (adv.), Kado, nvXivbricrLs, kcoAwi?, Trpordrropcu, *a-Korei- 
 
 Polit. — ^airopprjp.a, ^yepavofiaria, Sia/3ovAevop.cu, SuoTcara- 
 IJiaOrjTos, kyKaipia, eioreAo 
 i'pebpa, IbtOTtjs, * KOiv&vrn 
 ourjptia, irapLcpvXos, irpoKpims, \pr\Topzla, fcriiyKaTapiywpi (Eur. 
 H. Fur.), "* avjj.p.ip:ovp,ai, f crv\x-napaKoXov6G>, crvvayvpp.6s } crvvaTio- 
 reAw, *<TwfaaKv(3€pv&, aaxppoviKos, ^xrjvopaTia, *xiXtavbpos. 
 
xxx GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 'Aypci/ijuaro? (Polit. Tim. Critias), dicparr/? (Soph. Legg.), 
 avdarcLTos (Soph. Legg.), airibzlv (Sopli. Philcb. Legg.), afap- 
 ixi]vivti) (Soph. Legg.), acpAa/cros (Polit. Legg.), ZyKiiipos (Polit. 
 Legg.), etiboais (Polit. Legg.), ep:i7opeuriKos (Polit., Zfj.TTopevoiJi.ai 
 Legg.), cv6.pi6iJ.os (Soph. Philcb.), kirUXriv (Soph. Philcb. Tim.), 
 e^Aa/3^'? (Polit. Legg.), evTrpe-rnjs (Soph. Polit. Legg.), fT/pep-cuo? 
 (Polit. Legg.), f tfypauAeiv (Polit. Legg.), Ito-ploty]? (Polit., 
 hap-m Legg.), Karairavoi (Polit. Philcb.), \xe6r}p.e pivos (Soph. 
 Tim.), p.i]vvTris (Polit. Legg.), fpia-flcoens (Soph. Legg.), p.ovap- 
 X^a (Polit. Legg.), fvoptofler^a (Polit. Legg.), -nepikd-nb) (Polit. 
 Tim. Critia. Legg.), tt poap.ly wp.i (Polit. Legg.), 7rpocrn;)(?/s 
 {yiyveaOai tivi), (Polit. Legg.), (TKorohtvla (Soph. Legg.), cvy- 
 yvp,vao-Tijs (Soph. Legg.), avyKaTaa-KevdC^ (Polit. Legg.), avK- 
 Xayyava (Polit. Tim.), ^avvaTrepydCeaOat (Polit. Tim.), *avv- 
 hia-novS) (Soph. Legg.), crvve(pe7Top.ai (Soph. Tim. Critia. Legg.), 
 To\p.rip6s (Soph. Legg.), tcl ^vt]Qivra (Soph. Tim.), yoXenoTr\<i 
 (Soph. Critia. Legg.). 
 
 The facts thus enumerated indicate as characteristic of the 
 language of these dialogues, (i) An extreme minuteness of 
 distinction, giving rise to new compounds and derivatives, and 
 to the employment of old words with new shades of meaning. 
 (2) An affectation of variety, leading to different modes of ex- 
 pressing the same thing. (3) Combined with these a learned 
 fulness of diction, commanding the resources of the written as 
 well as of the spoken language, and moulding old words to 
 the expression of new ideas : e. g. vvp.(pevTrjs } " one who brings 
 together in marriage;" aypap.p.a.Tos, "unwritten ;" ao-rpocpos, 
 " without twisting." (4) The frequent and familiar use of 
 words denoting physical and mathematical as well as ethical 
 conceptions. To which may be added (5) the tendency to 
 fix in language some of the leading generalizations of philo- 
 sophy. This last point affords a partial approach to the 
 terminology of Aristotle, who has adopted several of the terms 
 here used. The re-adoption of words from the poets and 
 early writers, and the invention of new compounds, are charac- 
 teristic also of Isocrates and Xenophon; and many of the 
 words thus introduced became part of the vocabulary of the 
 later prose writers. But when the five points are taken to- 
 gether, the language of these dialogues is seen to be that of 
 Plato, with the peculiarities somewhat exaggerated ; the most 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xxxi 
 
 marked features being the invention of technical expressions 
 and the preference for words belonging to the tragic period 
 of Greek poetry. 
 
 That these dialogues shew an increased tendency to the 
 use of a peculiar diction, is proved sufficiently by the occur- 
 rence in 108 pages (ed. St.) of 270 words not found else- 
 where in Plato, and upwards of 90 words not found in 
 other Greek writers. It is true that 60 of these 90 words, 
 and about 90 of tho 370, may bo set down to the method 
 of dichotomies, but there remain the goodly allowance of about 
 180 words peculiar to these amongst the Platonic dialogues, 
 and at least 30 airag dpr][j.4va } a number which might be in- 
 creased if it were lawful to add those words which do not occur 
 earlier, and which later Platonists, like Plutarch and Clemens 
 Alexandrinus, have evidently adopted from this source. 
 
 But there are Platonic dialogues in which there are equally 
 marked peculiarities of diction. These are the Phsedrus, Re- 
 public, Timseus (including the fragment of the Critias), and 
 Laws. The first of these abounds in poetical words, and 
 there is probably no writing of equal length from which so 
 rich a vocabulary could be procured. But this may partly 
 be accounted for by the unwonted enthusiasm which Socrates 
 confesses that he feels " swelling in his breast." The rich 
 garment of expression, "stiff with cloth of gold," is confessedly 
 worn for the occasion ; and though bearing a certain relation 
 to the language of these dialogues, has an air of wildness and 
 novelty, and a brilliance of unpremeditated force which is 
 absent here. The case of the Phsedrus then may for the 
 present be treated as exceptional. And the same may be said 
 of the Republic, which abounds in peculiar words, not from 
 singularity, but from an overflowing richness and variety. 
 
 The Timseus, Critias, and Laws, in 436 pages have 1492 
 words which occur nowhere else in Plato. Of these nearly a 
 third part belong to the Timasus and Critias, which in 91 pages 
 have 427 words which occur in no other Platonic dialogue. 
 This large proportion is no doubt in part due to the peculiarity 
 of subject; but in the Laws alone, which as a political and 
 ethical treatise is not materially different in this respect from 
 the greater number of Plato's writings, there are (in 345 pages) 
 nearly a thousand words which he has not used elsewhere. 
 
jcxxii GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Jt remains to ask whether in those dialogues which have 
 a peculiar vocabulary the peculiarities are of the same kind. 
 This question may be partly answered by glancing at the lists 
 of words given above, and counting the number of those in 
 each category which occur in the Sophist or Politicus, and in 
 the Tiniams, Critias, or Laws, but appear in no other dialogue. 
 The coincidences noticed under the first head will appear 
 especially striking. It will also be seen that the coincidences 
 •with the Philebus, although not numerous are characteristic, 
 especially under /3. See especially yivos, yivzcris, 77?^ts, o-co/xa, 
 vXi]. This line of proof might be indefinitely extended by 
 adducing words peculiar to the latter dialogues but similar in 
 kind to those peculiar to the former % and words which 
 though not peculiar to them are found to occur with in- 
 creased frequency in both 1 ". It may be left to the student 
 to examine these analogies for himself; but to give cogency 
 to these "concomitant variations 1 ' it is necessary to present 
 the negative side of the inquiry. It has been shewn that the 
 Sophist and Politicus on the one hand, and the Timseus, Critias, 
 and Laws on the other, have certain peculiarities of diction ; 
 and also that these peculiarities are to some extent the same 
 or similar. It must be further inquired whether any other dia- 
 logues equally with the Sophist and Politicus share the pecu- 
 liarities of the Timseus, Critias, and Laws. If account be taken 
 of what I have ventured to call the technical words, the 
 answer is clear. There is no dialogue which equally with 
 these five combines the various elements of diction above- 
 mentioned. In poetical and rhetorical words the Phsedrus 
 can hardly be exceeded; but the number of words which 
 occur only in the Phsedrus, Timseus, Critias, and Laws, is less 
 in proportion than the number of those occurring only in the 
 Sophist, Politicus, Timseus, Critias, and Laws; and considerably 
 less than those confined to the Politicus, Timseus, Critias, and 
 Laws, although slightly exceeding those found only in the 
 
 Q Such as afiws, Legg. (5.); aPiaarros, Legg. (8.) ; advpw, Legg. (8.) ; aQuros, 
 
 Tim. (5.) ; a./3ovAr)Tos, Legg. (a.) ; aye- Legg. (5.) 
 
 yes, Tim. (a.) ; ayevvr\Tos, Tim. (a.); ay- r Such as (ppdfa, irepiexw, itepikay.- 
 
 vevw, ayveia, Legg. (y.) ; ayxtiTTeto, fSduoi, p.eTpr\TM6s, air epyd(o/J.ai, fiero- 
 
 Legg. (5.); aydivifffia, Legg. (5.) ; a8<e- X os > irpoaipeiffBat, i[i<pavi£a>, (pvAov, <pav- 
 
 pewrjros Tim. (e.) ; aeupvyia, Legg. rd^eudai, an6cpacris, p7)dev, irp6<rprifxa, 
 
 (e.); aQ\7}ixa, Legg. (3.); aOKw, Tim. the indefinite nor epos. 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xxxiii 
 
 Sophist, Timiieus, Critias, and Laws. But, if the Phsedrua 
 is treated as exceptional, there is no other dialoguo which 
 equally with these approximates to the language of tho later 
 dialogues, as measured by the number of words (in proportion 
 to the number of pages) which the dialogue in question shares 
 with the Timoous, Critias, or Laws, and with no other. The 
 Sophist, which is neither physical nor ethical, but dialectical, 
 and for this reason cannot be expected to abound in variety 
 of words, is nearer to tho Timgeus, Critias, Laws, when tried by 
 this test, than the Republic, which abounds in peculiar words, 
 which is linked by the author to the Timasus, and whose gene- 
 ral subject is closely similar to that of the Laws ; whilo the 
 proportion of the Politicus is fivo times that of the Gorgias, 
 and nearly ten times that of the Meno. The following table 
 exhibits approximately the numerical ratios of the several dia- 
 logues according to the number of words at once common and 
 peculiar to each with the Thnaeus, Critias, and Laws : — 
 
 Polit. I -j^. 
 
 Phasdo j^. 
 
 
 thyphr. Gorg. \ 
 
 soph.; 
 
 Polit. J y ' 
 
 Symp. if. 
 
 
 Euthyd. 4. 
 
 Phileb. f. 
 
 
 Critias 4- 
 
 PhEedr. 14. 
 
 Ion f . 
 
 
 Parm.Hipp.Min. \ 
 
 Soph. i^g-. 
 
 Theast. f . 
 
 
 Men. ^5. 
 
 Rep. 4. 
 
 Prot. Lach. 
 
 Lys.i 
 
 Ale. I. 4. 
 
 Menex. 4 • 
 
 Crat. Apol 
 
 Eu- 
 
 Charmid. ^. 
 
 The position of the Parmenides in this list, like that of the Phai- 
 drus, is partly accounted for by exceptional circumstances. 
 
 § 8. In grammar, structure of sentences, and rhythm, these 
 dialogues present the same affinities which were found in ex- 
 amining their vocabulary and general style. Bearing a certain 
 resemblance to Plato's other writings generally, they approach 
 most nearly to the Philebus, Timssus, Critias, and Laws. 
 
 ( 1 ) With respect to the grammar this remark will be seen 
 to be justified by many parallel passages which have been col- 
 lected in the notes to this edition. Of the following idioms 
 several may be paralleled from other dialogues: some from 
 other authors : but when taken together, they will be seen to 
 be especially characteristic of the group thus indicated. 
 
 s Considered as one continuous dialogue. For confirmation of these assertions, 
 see Ast's Lexicon Platonicum. 
 
 f 
 
xxxiv GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 i. The Ionic dative plural of the 2nd declension in <n occurs 
 twice in the Politicus : 262 a. bntkaa(ot<Ti (MSS. with one ex- 
 ception, ohti)) ; 304 e. tiro^voiaiv. Several instances of this 
 form might, however, be collected from the Tima)us and Laws. 
 It does not occur elsewhere in Plato. 
 
 ii. Perfects with present (perhaps frcruicntative) meaning : 
 
 eaiTovbaKa, Soph. 216, 251 c, 259 c; Ke'xprjpai, ib. 223 e; re- 
 davpciKa, ib. 251 c. Compare TerevraKa, Rep. 7, 521 e, Tim. 
 90 b. The so-called "aorist of custom" and the perf. pass, 
 with middle signification are too common to require special 
 mention here. 
 
 iii. The participle is used with the auxiliary verb instead 
 of one of the tenses of some other mood : 
 
 Soph. 217 c. airapvrjOels yevrj ; ib. 229 d. iarlv 2\ov ; ib. 
 235- a. e'x<ov Tvyyavei ; ib. 244 c. \6yov ovk av <-x ov (^ 0T "') 5 
 ib. 245 c. yeviaOai — ov. ib. d. elXrj(pbs (pavelrai ; ib. 260 d. 
 Z^apvov yeyovivai. Polit. 257 a. ciKrjKoores eiWi ; ib. 268 c. 
 Ae'yozre? — rvyyavoijiev; ib. 306 b. eorov zypvT*} 
 
 iv. The cognate accusative of the active becomes the subject 
 of the passive voice. This extension of a common idiom occurs 
 sometimes in tragedy, e. g. Sophocles, Trach. 169. tolovt ecppaCe 
 irpbs 6eS>v eip.apju.eVa t&v 'Hpa/cAeiW kKTeXevraadai icovcav ( = tov 
 'HpanXrj reAeuray rovs ttovovs Toiavra, cogn. ace). In the So- 
 phist, where much has to be said of various processes, this form 
 of expression is often found convenient, e.g. 221 a. to ttjs — 
 TrXrjyfis — avaair^ixevov, " the stroke effected by an upward 
 jerk ;" cf. Polit. 271 a. to e£ aXXrjXav — yevva>p.€vov. By a fur- 
 ther extension of the same usage, the verbal noun in fj.a often 
 means not the result of an act, but the act or process itself: so 
 5?p\.top:a, Soph. 262 a ; yeWrjpa, ib. 266 e ; ptprjp:a Polit. 274 a ; 
 and, as I venture to think, o-nipp.a, ib. 272 e. The case of 
 8pe[xp.a, ib. 289 b, is even more peculiar ; here a transition is 
 made from the act to the means by which the act is performed, 
 just as often happens with the English verbal noun in ing 
 (e. g. furnishings, trappings, dressing, &c.) . 
 
 v. One instance at least occurs of the infinitive used for the 
 imperative : Soph. 262 e. av pot (ppafciv. 
 
 vi. And one of the imperative put interrogatively : 
 
 * Periphrases are altogether more frequent : e. g. t/Aos exew. 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xxxv 
 
 Polit. 295 0. |u?) ^eoro) 8?/ — ; Cf. Aeschin. iii. %\ t 8n 1)^6.- 
 \ir\v [Ai] a~nohr]\Ai}(T(ii ; 
 
 vii. Partitive genitives arc frequent : c. g. 
 
 Soph. 265 a. T1JS KTT]TlKrjS. 
 
 Polit. 281 e. t&v ahi&v. 
 
 Cf. Phileb. 56 a. teal £vp,Tiacra avrys avkrjTLK'q; 
 
 viii. Attraction, 
 
 of an adverb, Polit. 263. 66ev=evTev6ev, ov. 
 of a verb, Soph. 263. ws eoue — yiyvevQai^yiyverai, ojs 
 iotKev. Cf. Phileb. 61 c. 
 
 ix. Apposition, 
 
 a. Sing, and plur. kv rravra, frequent here and in Phileb. 
 Polit. 306 d e. t&xos koI crcpobpoTTjTa kclI o^vrrjra — avro. 
 
 b. Femin. and neut. Soph, to p.ev novrfpta Kakovp,evov. 
 
 c. Masc. and fem. or neut. (concrete and abstract), 
 
 Polit. 259 d. 7TokiTLK7]V nai ttoXltlkou KCU j3aaiklK.T)V KO.I 
 
 fiacnktubv — ly rtavra ravra. 
 
 d. Of clauses, 
 
 (i.) To each other, Polit. 257 d. ravra — nonqreov ovk ciito- 
 
 crrariov. 
 (ii.) To a demonstrative : frequently to be or to be ye. 
 
 Soph. 244 a. to be tovtov yfyvrjrai irav rovvavriov. 
 
 Polit. 263 d. to be ye — to\\ hv — biovop.a(oi. lb. 308 e. 
 
 ravrov br'] ju.01 rov(? rj (BacnkiK^ (patverai, K.r.k. 
 (iii.) To a relative, Soph. 227 c. onep ijpov, K.r.k. lb. 
 
 236 d. o Se Kal tot rip,(peyv6ovv, K.r.k. 
 
 x. The use of the neut. article with the genitive to express 
 the abstract notion of a thing, is especially frequent in the 
 Politicus and Laws. Polit. 263 c. to rqs airoirkav^aecos. lb. 
 274 d, to rod pjvOov. 
 
 xi. Ellipse (more frequent in the Sophist), 
 
 a. Soph. 225 &• t<3 8e koyovs irpbs koyovs (yiyvop.£vu>). 
 lb. 233 b. ]u.?jr' efyaivovro (6p9a>s avrikeyecv). 
 lb. 235 b. bebeiKrai tolvvv (belv). 
 lb. 238 c. pj} ov be (erretbav keyap.ev). 
 lb. 248 e. to be {av (palev). 
 Polit. 276 c. rt \J\v (ebei); — ekeyofiev (belv). 
 lb. 301 b. TTpocnrotTJTaL be m 6 emaT'qp.oiv (apxew). 
 f 2 
 
■i GENERAL [NTRODUCTION. 
 
 b. Of to jxtv with to be following, 
 
 Sopll. 221 0. VeVCTTlKOV /xtpOVS, TO 0£ TI(.(qV. 
 
 lb. 267 b. veve\i-\\<jQu>, to oe p.eOeto-Oo). 
 
 Polit. 291 c. n//oavz;/8i, to oe jda<n\iK^. Cf. Phileb. 36 e. 
 
 \jfevbds, al b' aki]Ods — fjboval. Hence in Phileb. 66 c. 
 emo-njixos, to?? 5' alaOi'jrreaw, should probably bo read 
 i-nLo-T^ixais with corr. 2. Legg. passim. 
 
 c. Of the apodosis after \xev, 
 Soph. 240 b. ioiKus \xev. 
 
 Polit. 311b. to 8' ev tcus irpagecnv to jxkv 6ia</>epoWcos.' 
 to-xet. Cf. Rep. 455 e ; Symp. 207 d ; Theaot. 191c; 
 Apol. 18 d. Cf. Horn. II. 22. 157. 
 i. Pleonasm, 
 
 a. Simple, of betv, Soph. 221 a. orrep npov6ep.eda Seu> e£ei>- 
 
 p&v. Repetition of avros, Polit. 268 a (cf. the frag- 
 ment of iEsch. in Rep. 2, 383 c) etvat, lb. 300 c. els 
 hvva\xtv elvai. Comparative, lb. 288 b c. [xakXov — 
 
 dp0OT€pOV. 
 
 b. Redundant or explicit use of the participle, Soph. 225 a. 
 
 8vo\xa \eyeiv — TiQep.evovs. lb. 229 e. w y^pStVTai, to. pCev 
 yakenatvovTes, to, be ju.aA(9aK&>Te'pa)? "napay.vQovixevoi. lb. 
 234 c. dboiXa Xeyop,eva. lb. 240 a. evl -npouei-nelv ovo- 
 fjLCLTt. qb8ey£6.p.evos. lb. 243 b. <p6ey^rjTai Xeycov. lb. 
 252 b. biaipovcnv — bio.ipovp.evoi. Polit. 274 e- r]p.apTo- 
 fxev auo(pr]vd[xevoL. lb. 280 e. TeXeov XeXeyp,evov. Cf. 
 Legg. 9, 879 d. etTe vaXca ivoiKovvros, e'bre ver/Xvbos 
 CMpiyp-ivov. 
 (N. B. There is a strong tendency to the use of participial 
 expressions generally.) 
 
 c. The same love of explicitness is shewn in the repeti- 
 
 tion, with or without modification, of a verbal notion 
 which has been already expressed or implied ; often 
 causing a return from a more dependent to a less 
 dependent construction, as from participle to infini- 
 tive, infinitive to subjunctive, infinitive or subjunctive 
 to indicative. Soph. 216 e. ToYe be o-o<pLo-Tal, totc be 
 bo^av irapdo-xoLVT av. lb. 225 c. a/xcpicr/fyTeirai fxev v 
 aTe^vm be. — irepl ovto irpaTTeiai.. lb. 243 a. yaXeTiOV, 
 koX TrArj/x/xeAes e-niTip.av. lb. 246 d. Tioieiv — ■noiQ>p.ev. 
 lb. 248 c. Xeyovcrtv 8ri — p.iv — be — (pu<r£v. Polit. 263 d. 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xxxvii 
 
 •npoaztiTOi, lb. 293 e. p.ep,ipS]aOai. lb. 299 d. Ozacrai- 
 p.eOa. lb. 302 c. e(j)ap.ev. Cf. Symp. 177c; Apol. 1 9 0. 
 
 xiii. Ylpbs to o-rjjxaivop.evov. 
 
 The sentence is sometimes continued as if a word in 
 
 composition were fully expressed. 
 Soph. 219 a. artyyov, aXXrjV be bvvap.iv eyov. 
 lb. 249 d. rcS — </)t\ocro0a) teal Tavra fxaXiara tijjmvtl. 
 Cf. Legg. J, 8lO a. (piXojJLaOovvTL p.t]be luaovvri. 
 xiv. " Pendent" constructions. 
 
 Of the nom tJ Soph. 247 C. vav 6 p.rj bvvarol — elaCv, 00s apa 
 tovto . Polit. 303 c. tovto \xev areyj>m axrirep bpapa 
 
 K.T.X. 
 
 Gen. with irepl, Soph. 258 e. Trepl kvavriov twos — yalpeiv 
 
 Xeyopev. 
 Dat., Polit. 295 e. rw be to. bUaia — k.t.X. 
 Ace, Polit. 295 d. Trav to toiovtov ^vpfialvov — ye'Acos av 6 
 
 lieyicrTos yiyvoiTO t&v tolovtojv vopLoOeTtjixaTcov. lb. 282 e. 
 
 to p,ev oLTpoiKT^ — oaa hi ye av — . lb. 283 a. to ye nj? 
 
 vcpavTLKris p<tpo$ — . lb. 306 c.'QgvTrjTa koI ra^os — . With 
 
 Ttapa, lb. 300 b. Trapa yap olpai tovs vop.ovs — . 
 
 xv. The construction as well as the diction is often varied 
 in successive clauses. 
 
 Soph. 248 b. ye^e'eret — Trpbs ovcriav. lb. 244 d. ?} p,rjbevbs — 
 ei be tlvos. lb. 245 c. re — xal p.r)i> — ye. 
 
 xvi. The subject of the inversion of words belongs rather to 
 the structure of sentences than to grammar. But it may be 
 well in this place to call attention to the frequency of hyper- 
 baton, especially in the use of particles. E. g. Soph. 263 c. 
 ecpapev — irov. lb. d. p.ivTOL. lb. 264 a. OTav — av. 
 
 Several of these modes of expression, such as the redundant 
 participle, the use of the auxiliary verb, and the extension of 
 the cognate accusative, not to mention the Ionic dative plural, 
 and the peculiar effects of attraction, are in the manner of 
 tragedy; and we may therefore be the less surprised at such 
 directly tragic forms of expression as Soph. 238 a. pL-q-noo p,ey 
 eiTTrjs. lb. 235 a. vvv vp-irepov epyov i]br\ tqv 6rjpa p.r\KeT avelvai. 
 lb. 229 e. apxcuoTTpeiris tl iraTpiov. lb. 235 d. ov p,rj Trore exepvybv 
 errev^Tai, or such "pregnant" constructions as in Polit. 271 a. 
 abrjXov — 8tec/)#eipero. Cf. Legg. II, 926 b. paivop,eva Krjbevpara. 
 
xxxviii GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 (2) It may bo remarked generally with regard to the 
 structure of tho sentences in these dialogues, that they are 
 more elaborate and also more irregular than in the greater 
 number of Plato's writings. They have less of the sponta- 
 neous movement of conversation, and in the Politicus especially 
 are often more redundant and complicated. While the reader's 
 car is filled with a peculiar stately rhythm, his attention is 
 quickened by artificial or poetical collocations of words. These 
 traits are clearly marked in the dialogues before us ; they 
 may be traced also in the Philebus and some parts of the 
 Phsedrus, and they are eminently characteristic of the Laws. 
 
 Note for example the elaborateness and balanced formality 
 of the following replies : 
 
 Soph. 217 a. ri 8e fxaXia-Ta Kal to txoiov nepl avr&v biaTro- 
 
 prjdels epeuQai bievoijQrjs ; 
 lb. 224 c. kcu tl tls av dXXo elirvv ovk c\v ttA 17/^X067 TtXi]V 
 
 to vvv ^r\rovp.evov avTo elvaL to crocpLcrTLKov yevos ', 
 lb. 226 b. to ttoHop nepl clvtQv (3ovXrjdels brjXaxiaL, ■napabeiy- 
 
 [xcvra Trpodeh Tama KaTa ttcivtcov fjpov ; 
 lb. 234 b. ovbap.G>s' irdp.TioXv yap elprjKas ethos els ev ■navra 
 
 avXXa/3o)v Kal a^ebbv iroiKiXdiTaTOV. 
 Polit. 262 c. ■ndiov ovv brj <ppa£eLs hiaipovp.ivovs r)p.ds ovk 
 
 6p6a>s apTi bpav ; 
 lb. 270 b. (paiveTaL y ovv brj Kal jxdka et/co'reos dprjcrOai irdvTa 
 
 ocra bieXijXvOas. 
 lb. 277 a. Kal KLvbvvevei y\ & £eVe, TeXecos av ijjuv ovtohs 
 
 e\eLV 1] 7T€pl TOV TToXiTLKOV CLTlobeL^lS. 
 
 lb. 284 e. /cat jieya y eK&Tepov Tp.r)p,a cures, Kal tsoXv bta- 
 tpepov aXXrjXoiv. 
 Compare with these Phil. 29 d. tls yap a-noKpiv6\xevos dkkos 
 vyiaivcdv av hots, (paveirj ; lb. 32 d. 'Op0orara keyeLs otl TavTrj 7777 
 Set biaitopzv&rjvai to vvv p.eTabL(aKop.evov. lb. 47 c. TldvTa, a> 2w- 
 KpaTes, to. crvpLfiaivovTa npbs tQ>v irokk&v dv6pu>iru)V ds bogav bee- 
 Ttipavas. Tim. 29 d. "Aptora, 00 Ttjuate, iravTa-nao-i re as KekeveLS 
 cnrobeKTeov to jikv ovv Ttpooifiiov cov davpLaaMS direbe^dp-edd aov, 
 tov be brj Xoyov r)\uv e<fie£rjs nepatve. Legg. I, p. 627 c. Kal p.dka 
 cltottov, 3) $eve, to vvv Xeyop.evov, o/xws b opLokoyelv ovtcos dvay- 
 KaioTaTov. lb. 628 c. Ovtco iras av e9eXoi irporepov r) Ketvm irepl 
 Trjv aiiTov yiyvevOai itoXiv. lb. 639 c. iravTairaai Tiva Trovrjpbv 
 keyeis, Kal ovbapi&s dvbpG>v apxovra, dXXd tlvcov vtyobpa yvvaiK&v. 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xxxix 
 
 In these and numberless other places thcru is easily recog- 
 nised the presence of a common typo. The same careful 
 precision is observable in the cxplicitncss with which a ques- 
 tion is often stated. See Soph. 218 c; 230 b, c, d; 248 d, e; 
 265 c ; Folit. 262 c, d, e ; 293 a, b ; and compare Phil. 12 c, d ; 
 15 b, c ; 18 b, c, d, and Legg. 637. 
 
 Instances of redundancy and complication, of a somewhat 
 harsher kind than those of the Phsedrus, Gorgias, or Republic, 
 arising more from lengthiness than fulness, will soon enough 
 become familiar to the student of these dialogues. Meanwhile 
 the following passages may be taken as samples : Soph. 230 
 c, d; Polit. 288 d, 293 b, 298 c, d, 309 b. Compare Phil. 
 17 d, e ; Legg. 716 b, 740 d, 779 d. Such irregularities are 
 especially frequent in the Politicus and Laws. 
 
 In point of rhythm and the collocation of words, these 
 dialogues hold, with the Philebus, an intermediate place be- 
 tween the Pheedrus (to which may here be added the Theae- 
 tetus and Republic) and the Timaeus, Critias, and Laws. 
 
 Every reader of Plato is acquainted with the poetic cadences, 
 which in his more highly wrought passages he occasionally 
 introduces, not without a smile at his own magnificence. In 
 the myths especially (to use his own words), he speaks with 
 a tragic air, as if telling a tale impressively to children. (Rep. 
 8, 545 e. eux.coiJ.e6a reus Movacus direlv fjjjuv cc "0 77(77) cos 8r) irpco- 
 tov crracrts e/xrrfcre," kcu cpconev avras rpayiKCos, cos 7rpos iralbas 
 rjfjias irai^ovaas /cat epecrxTjAoucras, cos St) enrovhrj Xeyovcras v^\rrjXo- 
 Xoyovixivas Aeyeiv ;) Examples will readily occur from the 
 Protagoras, Symposium, Theaetetus (172—177), and the con- 
 clusion of the Republic (where note especially the speech of 
 Lachesis). It appears from the Phsedrus that these harmonies 
 were not unconscious. The Socrates of that dialogue is sur- 
 prised to find himself discoursing in this unwonted strain. 
 When the afflatus of the higher rhetoric first descends on 
 him, he says, " I am speaking almost in dithyrambs/'' and 
 afterwards, when he breaks out into a verse in the epic 
 metre, he remarks on this as shewing a further access of 
 enthusiasm. The ironical shyness with which he at first ex- 
 ercises his suddenly acquired gift wears off as he proceeds, 
 and in the second long speech, or " palinode," he evidently 
 "forgets that they are at play." Both speeches, besides 
 
xl GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 such mock-poetical turns as £vp.p.ot. XafteaOe tov pvOov, — r.a- 
 piTe bij, Opeppara yevvaxa, KaXXi-naibd re <\>albpov -neLQeTe, aro 
 full of a sententious solemnity and rich music, to which the 
 choice and arrangement of the words contribute largely. 
 The following single phrases will partly illustrate this : 246 d. 
 6 pXv bij p.eyas fjyep.ihv ev ovpavu Zeus, eXavvotv T7Ti]vbv apjxa, 
 TtpSnos iropeveTai. 247 a. tG>v dXXojv ocrot ev rcj> tG>v bubeica 
 api0p<2 TeraypLevoi Oeol ap^ovTes. lb. b. ditpai' vtto tt]v vttov- 
 pdviov &\J/Z8a TTOpevuvrai, irpbs dvavTes 7/877. lb. fipiOei yap 6 T?pi 
 KaK??? iTf-n-09 p-ere^v. lb. 248 b. iroXXal p.ev yjuXevovTai, ■noXXol 
 be iroXXa TTTepa Opavovrai, iraaat be noXvv eypvcrai ttovov areXels 
 rrjs tov ovtos 6eas a-nepyovTai — where the alliteration also adds 
 to the effect. 
 
 The music of language, thus half-humorously struck out, 
 seems to have had an increasing fascination for Plato, and 
 sounds on unreservedly in his latest works. In the Tirnaeus 
 and Laws these tragic and " dithyrambic" cadences are no 
 longer occasional, but perpetual, and the speaker does not 
 now "veil his face" with Socratic irony while uttering them. 
 There appears an increasing preference for balanced phrases 
 and "good mouth-filling" words. The rhythm, however, while 
 more laboured, is less varied and less instinct with movement 
 and life. The following examples are taken almost at random. 
 
 Tim. 41 e. Scot be arrapeicras clvtcls els ra irpoarjuovra eK&aTcus 
 e'/cacrra opyava \povov (pvvai ^wcoi' to 6eocrefBe<JTaTOV. lb. 47 b. 
 raXXa be, ocra eXaTTco, tL av vp.volp.ev ; S>v 6 pJr) cpiXocrocpos rut/JAco- 
 dels obvpop-evos av Oprjvoi p.aT7Jv. Legg. ] , 644 b. bel bi] ti]v 
 Traibeiav p.r]bap.ov aTip\a(eiv, m irp&Tov t&v KaXXtorcnv tols aptarois 
 avbpacn Tiapayiyvop.evov. lb. 2, 6$$ d. 6eol be olKTeipavres to 
 tw d>0pw-nw e-n'movov ire^VKOs yivoq. lb. 654 e. pL&raios 6 p,eTu 
 Tao0' fjpuv i:ep\ iraibeias opdr\<$ elff 'EXX-qvLKrjs ehe (3apfiapt,Ki]s 
 Xoyos av elrj. lb. 66 1 b. to brj TeXos airdarjs paKaptoTrjTOS elvai 
 to TavTa neKT-qpLevov aOavaTov elvai yevop,evov 6 u Tax}.o-Ta. lb. 
 3, 677 e. pcvpiav piev riva (pofiepav epr\p.iav, yrjs be acpOovov TtXr\- 
 60s Trdp-TToXv, ((aw be t&v aXXvv eppovTcav /3ovkoXl ajra, Kal el 
 t( hov aly&v irepiXeicpOev yevos. lb. 7, 824 a. 77 tS>v bia-navp-ara 
 iroVwi' expvera. lb. 8. 831 e. tov <payeiv TravTobaira Kal Tiieiv 
 ojcraTJrcos Kal afypobiamv naaav tt&vtvs irapao-yelv TtXr]o-p.ovrjV. 
 lb. 842 e. avayKaiov vop.odeTovvTa eari Tpeireadat. lb. 4, 716 a, 
 b, 9, 854 a, 878 b, 11, 919 a, b. 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xli 
 
 If wo turn now to the Philobus, Sophist, and Politicus, we 
 shall find a rhythm less inflated and monotonous than that of 
 the Laws, less free and various than that of the Pluedrus, but 
 essentially resembling both. If the cadences of the Phsedrus 
 have a dithyrambic wildness, and thoso of the Laws are 
 oratorical rather than poetical, these would most aptly be com- 
 pared to the refined moderation and calm statclincss of Attic 
 tragedy. So far as a thing of this kind can be reduced to 
 rule, the artifices by which the effect is secured are chiefly 
 two: (i) The careful balancing of words so as to relieve the 
 tediousness of a lengthened phrase, by the counterposition of 
 noun and epithet, verb and participle, subject and object, and 
 by the alternation of emphatic and unemphatic words ; (2) 
 The adjustment of long and short syllables so as to quicken or 
 retard the movement of the sentence. (That this is no mere 
 fancy may be gathered from the re-introduction of the Ionic 
 dat. plur. in 01.) Sometimes short syllables are accumulated 
 as in choric metres : more often a sentence is concluded with 
 an Iambic hemistich, or with a dochmiac, each generally ter- 
 minating with a dissyllable, which is often divorced from the 
 immediate context. But there is something beyond this 
 unconscious mechanism, which can be discovered by the ear 
 alone. A very few instances out of many are all that can be 
 quoted here. 
 
 Soph. 218 d. et pv>] (tv iroOev euireTeorepai' e^eis zIttuv aWrjv 
 oSdc. 234 d. kcu ixavTa TtavTt] avaTtrpcufidai ra kv rots Ao'yots 
 (})avTd<r[xaTa into t&v kv rat? Tipa^ecriv €pya>v irapayevopLevav. 
 242 a. Tj to irapairav iariov, et touto tXs tlpyil bpdv oWos. 259 d. 
 oin-e tls eXeyxos ovtos ak-qOivos, apri re t&v ovtmv tlvos ecpa-nro- 
 fxivov brjkos veoyevrjs &v. 
 
 Polit. 26 1 e. Tt\ovcria>T€po5 ei? to yrjpas avacpavrjcreL (ppovr\- 
 aem. lb. tt]V oe aytkcuoTpotpLKrjv dp' ivvoch irf] rt? btbv[xov 
 anocprivas r6 (r}ToviLevov kv biirkaaioLcn ravvv iv rots fjpuo-etriv els 
 Tore 7rot?/(ret (flTtlcrdai. 268 b. ovk akkos Kpeirrcoy iiapapcvdeicrOat 
 /cat Kr)\S>v Tipavve.iv juera re opyav&v k.cu \jnk<2 ro3 aro'/xart tt]V 
 tt]s amov Tro[p.vi]s aptara //eraxeioi^Oju.ez'o? p.ovmKi]v. 269 d. rots 
 TtuvTcav OetoTaTois 7Tjoocr?]/cet fjLoi/6i§. 270 a. tot€ b OTav avedfj, 
 8V kavTov amov Uvai, koto, Katpbv acpzQivTa tolovtov, wcrre ava- 
 Tiakiv iropzveo-Oai irokkas irepiobav p,vpiabas but to p-iyicnov ov 
 kcu laoppoTto>TaTov eiri //eyforou fidivov irobbs Uvai. 273 d. 8to 
 g 
 
xlii GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 dri tot ijbi] Oebs o Kovfxijvas avrov, KaOopdv ev airopLaLS ovra, 
 KrjbS[i€VOS tva fxi'i xdixdrrOeU ei? rbv rfjs bp.o lot 7]TO 9 aireipov ovtcl 
 tottoc bmj, -nahXv ec/>c%>o? avrov tG>v -nqhaXmv yiyv6p.cvo$, ro 
 vo(Ti](ravTa Kal \v9evra kv rfj na& kavrbv Trporepq, we/Hooto orrpo//as, 
 Koap.el re Kal k-navopQ&v uddvarov clvtov kcll ayijpoiv airepyaftTaL. 
 (This is almost in the manner of the Timseus and Laws.) 
 ]Ol ol. C7rei yevojitvov y av olov \4yop.ev dyaTracrOai re av Kal 
 oIkclv hLaKvfiepvwvTa eiiSai/xoVco? 6p0i)v d/cpi/3co? p.6vov rroKLrdav. 
 309. BtLav kv haip.ovm y[yvea9aL yivei. 
 
 The following are selected from many parallel examples in 
 the Philebus. 18 d. tovtov rbv beapLov av KoyLadfxevos cos ovra 
 era Kal TTCLvra ravra eV 7rco? noiovvra, \iiav eV avroLs cos ovaav 
 ypapL/JLaTLKip riyvtiv €77€(p0iy£aTO irpoa-eLTtow. 45 d. to be rcor 
 a(pp6v(0V re Kal vfipLaT&v pe'x/H p.av(as rj o-(pobpa rjbovi] Kareyovaa 
 TTepLJBorjTovs <XTr<zpya(eTai. 4.6 b. ctu|j.|juktoi' tovto y dp u> 2)co- 
 Kpares, eWe yiyveo-Qai tl ko.k6v. (Where there is *a manifest 
 approach to the structure of an Iambic line : o~vp\p.LKrov ap eWe 
 yLyveadai KaKov u .) 66 b. Trpwrov pikv irepl p.irpov Kal to p-irpLov 
 Kal irdvra OTToo-a XPV roLavra vop,l(€LV tijv a'CbLov rjpfjo-dal abvo-lv. 
 67. Kal robs 6-qpicov epcoras olovTai Kvpiovs eirai p,dprvpas p.dKKov 
 rj tovs kv Movo-jj (pLkoaocfxi) ^ep^avrevpevcav l/cacrrore Koyojv. 
 
 Whatever may be thought of a matter which depends so 
 much on individual impressions as this of rhythm, there can 
 be no question that the transposition of words from their 
 natural sequence, either for the sake of sound or emphasis, 
 which was noticed occasionally in the Thesetetus, Appendix A. 
 p. 218, becomes more frequent in these dialogues. See, for 
 instance, the hyperbaton of vvv in p. 218 b, and two other 
 places of the Sophist; and Polit. 268 e (rroAAd — hy\), 2j6 c 
 (eTnpe'Aeia — Kal — riyv-q), 280 d (ocrat re irepl rds kXottcls Kal rds 
 /3ia 7rpd£ets Sia/ccoAuriKa tpya irapexovraL re'x/'cu (ppaypdrcov x ) . 
 
 In more than one passage this has been the chief source of 
 difficulty to interpreters. Nor will it be denied that the same 
 symptom of laborious and artificial arrangement reappears with 
 increased frequency in the Laws. 
 
 u Cf. Polit. 300 a. rod krkov rod wpSaOiv fj-el^ov en tovto yiyvoiro kixk6v : sug- 
 gesting the line too irp6o-9e nti(ftv tovto ylyveTai ko.k6v. 
 x Soph. 253 c. Sia TtdvTcnv el (for el 5ia ■kolvtwv). 
 
 lb. e. lSe7v /j.ev xaAe7rbi> evapyoi? Kal tovtov. 
 
 Polit. 260 c. Trjs £wiTa.KTLKrJ9 ws ovto. avTbv t£x v7 I s - 
 
 lb. 27O C. T0ls iVTOS Tlu'lV OlKOVfftV O.VT0V. 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. iliii 
 
 § 9. The relation of our two dialogues to the Philebus on 
 the one hand, and on the other to the Timacus and Laws, which 
 is indicated by this general survey of their scope, method, 
 style and diction, and may perhaps be confirmed when each is 
 oxamined separately, contains the answer to the question raised 
 by Socher, Are these dialogues Platonic or Antiplatonic 1 
 
 The single point of authorship is iudccd sufficiently decided 
 by three references of Aristotle (Met. vi. 2, § 3, 1026 B, Ato 
 
 Ylk&TWV TpoTTOV TiVa OV KaKtoS T7]V aO(f)L(TTLKr]l> TT€pl TO fJLT] ov 
 
 fragev: ib. xi. 8, 1064 B; xii. 2, 1089 C), and in reference to 
 the Sophist few Platonic scholars will not feel the force of 
 Dr. Thompson's words (Genuineness of the Sophista, p. 5) : 
 " So far as the mere style is concerned, there is no dialogue 
 in the whole series more thoroughly Platonic. In their 
 structure the periods are those of Plato, and they are unlike 
 those of any other writer. Throughout, it seems to me, the 
 author is writing his very best. His subject is a dry one ; 
 and he strives to make it palatable by a more than ordinary 
 neatness of phrase, and by a sustained tone of pleasantry. 
 His style is terse or fluent, as terseness or fluency is re- 
 quired : but the fluency never degenerates into laxity, nor the 
 terseness into harshness. The most arid dialectical wastes 
 are refreshed by his humour : and bloom in more places 
 than one with images of rare brilliancy and felicity. Few 
 besides Plato would have thought of describing the endless 
 wrangling of two sects (?) who had no principle in common, 
 under the image of a battle between gods and giants; and. 
 fewer still, had they conceived the design, would have ex- 
 ecuted it with a touch at once so firm and so fine. What 
 inferior master could have kept up so well and with so little 
 effort, the fiction of a hunt after a fierce and wily beast, by 
 which the Eleatic stranger sustains the ardent Thesetetus amid 
 the toil and weariness of a prolonged logical exercitation ? 
 Or who could so skilfully have interwoven that exercitation 
 itself with matter so grave and various as that of which the 
 dialogue in its central portion is made up ? If vivacity in the 
 conversations, easy and natural transitions from one subject to 
 another, pungency of satire, delicate persiflage, and idiomatic 
 raciness of phrase are elements of dramatic power, I know no 
 dialogue more dramatic than the Sophistes/'' 
 2 2 
 
mu GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 But the objections of Soulier are not thus met, or rather the 
 difficulties which he raised arc not explained. And yet the 
 solution of them may contribute something towards a theory 
 of these dialogues, and may even throw some light on the 
 history of Plato's mind. 
 
 i. Sochcr objects first that the dichotomies, unlike the divi- 
 sions of the Gorgias and Philcbus, arc meaningless, arbitrary, 
 accidental, and tastelessly prolonged. It has been shewn that 
 division as a logical exercise was at one time rife in the school 
 of Plato ; that the use of that exercise here is propaedeutic and 
 provisional ; and that the method while used is also criticized, 
 modified, and partly rejected : that its use here is not more 
 singular than that of etymologies in the Cratylus : and that 
 as the Cratylus vein recurs occasionally in. these dialogues, so 
 traces of the method of dichotomies appear in the Laws. The 
 use of the method is also seen to be an approach to Aristotle, 
 who makes use of some of the divisions which are here in- 
 vented. 
 
 %. " The absence of humour, seen especially in the gravity 
 with which trivial examples are worked out." Whatever may 
 be thought of the humour of these dialogues, they are not less 
 humorous than the Timseus and Laws. And whoever misses 
 humour in them, will probably find the same want in the 
 greater part of the Philebus. Soche^s objection is really 
 based on the prominence which is given in these dialogues — 
 and also in the Philebus and Parmenides, and in a different 
 way in the Laws — to the idea of method. And it may be 
 retorted that the " gravity" is often that of the accomplished 
 humorist, who does not " himself laugh, to set on some 
 quantity of barren spectators to laugh too/'' 
 
 3. "Plato identifies Being with the ideas; Not-Being with 
 the objects of sense: the object of opinion being intermediate. 
 (Rep. v. 477-480.) The Eleatie Stranger takes no account of 
 this absolute antithesis of Being and Not-Being. Being, with 
 him, is the sum of all positive notions. Plato, on the other 
 hand, takes no account of the logical antithesis or correlation 
 of Being and Not-Being." 
 
 4. " Further, the Sophist contains a criticism of the Platonic 
 doctrine of Ideas." 
 
 These cardinal objections can only be fully met in the sepa- 
 rate Introduction to the Sophist, Meanwhile the reader 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xlv 
 
 may be asked to bear in mind what has been already said of 
 Plato's modification of his theory of Knowledge, and the un- 
 doubted approximation to the Aristotelian point of view which 
 appears in the Philebus, Timseus, and Laws. And we may notice, 
 as a discrepancy of the same kind, the final rejection in the 
 Thesetetus of a definition of Knowledge, which might well bo 
 thought essentially Platonic, namely, " True opinion able to 
 give a reason of itself" (S6£a aKiiQ)js juera Koyov). 
 
 5. To the Politicus, besides the general grounds (1 and 2), 
 Socher objects that the political notions here advanced are not 
 in harmony with the Republic, and still less with earlier dia- 
 logues. The examination of this point must also be reserved : 
 but we are in a position to remark that there is a third case 
 not put by Socher, viz. Is the Politicus intermediate between 
 the Republic and the Laws ? 
 
 6. Lastly, he observes that the idea of the Divine Govern- 
 ment, implied in the mythical description of the Saturnia 
 regna, is wholly unlike what appears in the Phsedo, Republic, 
 Tima3us, and Laws : with which the notion of God ever leaving 
 the helm of the universe is wholly irreconcilable. The signifi- 
 cance of this remark will be developed, when the Politicus is 
 considered separately. At present it may be enough to point 
 to the well-known passage in the tenth book of the Laws 
 (896 e), where an independent evil soul is postulated in order 
 to account for evil ; with which compare Rep. 2, 379 c, "God, 
 since he is good, cannot be the cause of all things, as most 
 men say, but of what happens to mankind little is due to him, 
 and there is much of which he is not the cause : for our good 
 is much less than our evil." 
 
 Each of Socher's objections, although inconclusive, arose 
 from the perception of some real peculiarity, of which those 
 who maintain the genuineness of these dialogues are bound 
 to give account. It will appear in the sequel, whether any 
 light is thrown upon this subject, when they are viewed, as by 
 the indications of style and diction we have been led to view 
 them, in especial connexion with the Thesetetus, Philebus, 
 TimaBus, Critias, and Laws. 
 
INTRODUCTION TO THE SOPHIST. 
 
 OF the title given to this dialogue by the early grammarians, 
 2,o(picrT7}9, rj Trepi rod ovtos, AoyiKo'?, the name Sophistes is so 
 far acknowledged by Plato himself, as in an allusion to it 
 which occurs in the succeeding dialogue, the form of referenco 
 used is kv rc3 o-o<^6aTr) a : i.e. "in discussing or defining the 
 Sophist." And nothing can be more explicit than the manner 
 in which this subject is proposed for definition in the opening 
 scene. Yet it may not unnaturally appear to many readers 
 that the remaining words, although of less authority, describe 
 more accurately the real subject of the dialogue, in which, it 
 may be thought, either two distinct inquiries are sought to be 
 combined by a tour de force, or the former of these is only 
 the occasion, excuse, or starting-point for the latter. 
 
 The questions which occupy the largest and certainly the 
 most important place are concerned with the nature of nega- 
 tion, the relativity of ideas, and the defects of early speculation 
 on the idea of Being. 
 
 It may not seem obvious why these metaphysical questions 
 should be necessarily involved in the study of a class of per- 
 sons whose procedure and influence was a matter of historical 
 fact ; or, again, supposing it necessary to raise and discuss 
 such difficulties, why they might not have been equally sug- 
 gested by some other example. We should bear in mind, 
 first, the extremely abstract and general manner in which 
 Plato looks at every problem ; the rarity of the metaphysical 
 atmosphere in which he lived. Rightly or wrongly, he passed 
 at once from the simplest to the deepest matters of thought : 
 
 a Such an aUusion to a previous dialogue is rare in Plato, and can hardly be 
 paralleled except from the Timaeus and Laws. 
 
INTRODUCTION TO THE SOPHIST. xlvii 
 
 like one possessed with a great passion, " examples, gross as 
 earth/' suggested to him the same themes, always old and 
 always new. Just as, in the Philebus, the distinction of 
 pleasures into good and bad suggests the problem of the one 
 and the many, the description of the Sophist as a " phantastic 
 artist" raises the whole question of the existence of the appa- 
 rent beside the real. But, secondly, the connexion of thought, 
 though at first sight remote, is, in this case at least, far from 
 being arbitrary or accidental. As the question is a cardinal 
 one, so is the instance by which the question is introduced. 
 Plato is not merely clothing an ontological discussion in the 
 garb of flesh and blood : it is at least equally true that in the 
 ontological problem he sums up the difficulties of life and 
 experience in the most abstract form : difficulties and con- 
 tradictions which he had elsewhere illustrated with dramatic 
 power. And the name Sophistes itself expresses a provisional 
 generalization, or vindemiatio prima. As in the Theaetetus, 
 the theory " Each man the measure of truth to himself" is the 
 most general expression for all opinion that is not founded 
 in reason, so the Sophist, even before definition, is, as he is 
 described in the Republic, only the conscious reflection and 
 embodiment of ordinary thought. 
 
 The fact remains, however, that the dialogue is naturally 
 divided into two main portions, one of which is enclosed or 
 embedded in the other. In the opening and concluding passages 
 (I.) an attempt is made to form a definite conception of the 
 genus Sophist by the method of dichotomies, i. e. through 
 logical divisions to follow the ramifications of the tree of know^- 
 ledge till the particular branch which supports him is dis- 
 covered. But there is a point (p. 236 d) at which this series 
 of divisions is interrupted by what is formally a long digres- 
 sion, but really the most serious part of the whole (II.), where 
 instead of dividing and subdividing, the mind is carried up to 
 reconsider the first principles on which this method of distinc- 
 tions, and all criticism and controversy, rest ; in other words, 
 to examine the meaning of negation, which cannot be deter- 
 mined without also examining the nature of positive concep- 
 tions. When this question has been set at rest, the divisions 
 are resumed (p. 264 b), and a definition is obtained, in which 
 the interlocutors acquiesce with more satisfaction than is 
 
 
xlviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 usually expressed at the conclusion of a Socratic dialogue. 
 It will bo convenient to treat these portions separately. 
 
 In I. the problem is presented in the concrete, but still 
 in a very general aspect. According to the habit of Socratic 
 induction it is assumed that the name Sophist, though applied 
 to a great variety of persons, has one meaning, which may 
 be ascertained by a process of definition : just as the word 
 'angler,' which is defined as a preliminary example, has one 
 meaning which can be clearly conceived and expressed. A 
 modern respondent might have questioned this assumption 
 at the outset, and have challenged Socrates to prove that the 
 word had the same meaning when applied to the poets by 
 Pindar, to the geometers by Socrates himself, to Zeno who 
 denied motion, to the Heracliteans who denied all else, to the 
 philologer Frodicus, and the astronomer Hippias, to Gorgias 
 who ignored speculative truth, and to Protagoras who held 
 every proposition to be of equal value. The possibility of 
 such a doubt does not occur to Plato. He has in his mind a 
 very simple, but a very sweeping distinction, for which the 
 names <ro<£to-T7)s and ^uAo'o-o^o? afforded the most convenient 
 expression : a distinction which occurred to him when he com- 
 pared Socrates with other teachers, and which it was the work 
 of his life to make clear to himself and others. This was the 
 distinction between real and apparent Knowledge ; the real 
 knowledge which Socrates sought, and the apparent know- 
 ledge which the others professed. In the Phsedrus and Gorgias 
 he had shewn that the so-called art of rhetoric had no scien- 
 tific basis : in the Protagoras and Meno, that the virtue which 
 was commonly praised and which the public teachers professed 
 to give was the result of habit and common opinion and not 
 of principle : in the Euthydemus, he had ridiculed the process 
 of mere verbal argument as contrasted with the real treatment 
 of logical difficulties: in many places he had satirized the 
 practice of receiving fees for teaching. The present inquiry is 
 more general than any of these; and is also restricted to the 
 consideration of the Sophist in the highest and most technical 
 sense, in which he is distinguished from the rhetorician and other 
 artists, as the professor of knowledge and teacher of virtue. 
 It was only in this aspect that the Sophist could compete with 
 the philosopher. The name might be applied to particular 
 
TO THE SOPHIST. xlix 
 
 artists, such as the poet or geometer, hut only incidentally , 
 and their partial claims were ahsorhed in the universal pic- 
 tensions of the Sophist par excellence. Further, those pre- 
 tensions are here idealized : for it is doubtful whether even 
 Gorgias or llippias, who were ready to answer all comers, 
 carried their professions to the extent described in pp. 232,233. 
 The neai-cst approach to an equally general statement of the 
 question is made in the Protagoras, pp.312 b — 314 c, where 
 Hippocrates is told that he is going to give his mind up to a 
 Sophist without knowing what a Sophist is. " It is not enough 
 to know that he is an artist, without knowing what is his par- 
 ticular work." (p. 312 c, d, e.) " Perhaps he is a merchant or 
 retail-dealer in the food of the mind. Take care that he does 
 not cheat us by praising his wares. For, if we buy them, we 
 cannot examine them, until we have received them in our own 
 persons either for good or ill b ." (pp. 313 c — 314 b. Compare 
 Soph. 223, 224.) Here there is the same assumption, which 
 appears in the " Sophist," that the common name implies a 
 common nature. But the analysis of the conception is carried 
 only a little way, and the characteristic chosen is external 
 merely, (a sufficient answer to those who suspect these dialogues 
 because the grounds of distinction which are adopted in them 
 are sometimes superficial). 
 
 To return. Although no doubt is entertained that there is 
 a common nature answering to the name Sophist, this nature 
 is, however, by no means easily found. " The creature is wily 
 and dangerous, and must be hunted with caution and good 
 heed." " He is not to be caught with one hand : we must lay 
 our snares in every path, till we have surrounded him." 
 Whether or not the task was rightly chosen, it was no mean 
 
 b Other scattered hints respecting (19 e), where the itinerant habits of the 
 
 the Sophists are found in the Meno, Sophist are said to disqualify him for the 
 
 where Anytus, who abhors them, can- task of conceiving the true state in act : 
 
 not tell what they are, but knows that in the Thesetetus, where it is said that 
 
 they are the ruin of their pupils : to those who have " no need of Socrates," 
 
 which Socrates replies, " Perhaps there i. e. no genuine impulse towards philo- 
 
 is something in that" (kcu "i<rws ti Ae- sophy, " may profit by the converse of 
 
 yeis) : in the Republic, where they are Prodicus, or of other wise and Heaven- 
 
 more as an effect than as a taught men :" and in the Gorgias (520), 
 
 cause, as the mere reflectors of popular where Socrates asserts that it is diffi- 
 
 opinion, only teaching men what they cult to distinguish the Rhetor from the 
 
 desire to be taught : in the Timeeus Sophist. 
 
1 INTRODUCTION 
 
 effort of generalization, to include in one notion persons so 
 different as Protagoras and Ilippias, and still more to embrace 
 the versatile activity of any of them in one description. This 
 meant little else than to express in one formula the intellectual 
 spirit of the age. Plato shews his consciousness of this diffi- 
 culty, and at the same time finds an occasion for satire, by 
 giving four distinct classifications, according to each of which 
 the Sophist may be referred to a different genus, while even 
 under the same genus it is not always clear to which of the 
 lesser species he belongs. To begin with the most obvious 
 characteristic, all art having been first divided into acquisi- 
 tive and creative, the Sophist is seen to angle for rich young 
 men, and is accordingly ranged with the angler under the 
 art of hunting, or catching by guile, which is one of the two 
 main branches of appropriation without consent : which was 
 previously distinguished from acquisition by contract. This 
 aspect of him is treated playfully. He is the congener of the 
 angler, with whom he parts company when they reach the art 
 of hunting live things — the Sophist turning to rich meadow- 
 lands of youth, which are irrigated by rivers of wealth. There 
 he pursues, not like other huntsmen a wild, but a tame quarry, 
 (at least if man is tame) : nor this, as kidnappers and warriors 
 do, by force, but by persuasion. And he persuades, not like 
 the lawyers, in public, but in private : not like the lover, at his 
 own expense, but for reward : and this, not like the flatterer's 
 reward, a bare maintenance from hand to mouth, but in the 
 form of money. (218 c — 223 b.) 
 
 This last touch is made the basis of a new line of definition, 
 starting from the other main branch of acquisition, viz. ex- 
 change. According to this, the Sophist is a merchant of 
 mental wares : which may be either taken at second-hand and 
 exported from city to city, in which case the Sophist is an 
 itinerant trader ; or he may be a retail dealer, or a manu- 
 facturer, in his own city. (223 c— 224 e c .) 
 
 Plato next fixes on a characteristic of a less trivial kind, to 
 which he refers afterwards as the most essentially distinctive of 
 those which have been put forward. The Sophist talks, as has 
 been said, to men in private on a great variety of topics ; but 
 his conversations have one feature in common. They are con- 
 
 c It is curious that paid teaching as re-admitted to Plato's favour in the 
 well as the " Rhetoric of Nestor" are Laws. 
 
TO THE SOPHIST. li 
 
 trovcrsial. He is a controversialist and a teacher of the art 
 of controversy. This brings him under the remaining branch 
 of acquisition without consent, namely, forcible acquisition or 
 contention : the art of open, as opposed to that of secret, appro- 
 priation. Not that the Sophist is here viewed as acquiring know- 
 ledge, but, as one engaged in preventing others from making 
 good a position by argument, he is said to be concerned with 
 acquisition (cf. p. 219 c: 'E^eiS?/ brjixtovpyet //,ez> ovbev tovtcov, to. 
 bi ovra nal yeyovora to. fx^v ytipovrai Ao'yots Kal TTpdigeat. ra 8e 
 toIs x€ipovjj.ivoi.s ovk e77trp€7iet). He contends, then, not with 
 bodily but mental force ; not with long arguments, as in court, 
 but through brief questions and replies : not on the infinity of 
 details about which men wrangle, but on the general nature of 
 the Just and Unjust, and of all other things : not, like some 
 wearisome talkers, to the injury of his property, but (to note 
 this point once more) to the increase of his gains. The So- 
 phist's procedure is here characterized as essentially abstract 
 and negative : being distinguished by the former quality from 
 ordinary converse, and by the latter from positive science and 
 philosophy. (225 a — 226 a.) It is not immediately apparent, 
 however, how, under this description, the work of the Sophist is 
 to be distinguished from the work of Socrates, except by the 
 outward symptom that the one becomes rich by his trade and 
 the other poor. And accordingly the two are brought into close 
 companionship in the remarkable passage which follows. (226 b- 
 23 1 a) . Controversy is, or should be, an art of separating the 
 false from the true, of determining what propositions are not 
 tenable. And this amounts to a most valuable purification of 
 the mind. For of separation there are two kinds, the sepa- 
 ration of like from like and the purgation of the good from 
 the evil : and of mental evils there are two kinds, that civil 
 war of reason and passion w r hich is the disease of the soul, and 
 ignorance, or spiritual ugliness, which is either conscious or 
 unconscious. Unconscious ignorance is the last stage of mental 
 deformity. And it is from this that men are freed when they 
 are asked questions about something which they think they 
 know, and are thus purged from the obstructions of conceit, 
 without which purgation no learning will do them any good. 
 This process is no other than the Elenchus. Shall Ave attri- 
 bute this to the Sophist ? Plato stands in doubt. 
 I12 
 
In LNTRODUCTION 
 
 We are thus led from observing a feature of the Sophist 
 
 which any one might verity, to a theory of his end or function 
 which is only temporarily admitted, and from which some- 
 thing is at once detracted. For the value of his office, as a 
 purifier of the mind, clearly depends in some measure on the 
 reality of the arguments by which he convinces men of error. 
 And these are presently shewn to be unreal. Yet Plato had 
 a meaning in assigning to him this function even provisionally : 
 and we have here perhaps the most striking appreciation of a 
 contemporary phase of thought which is to be found in ancient 
 philosophy. For it is the simple truth that Protagoras and 
 Gorgias did imperfectly and unconsciously a part of the same 
 work Avhich Socrates did thoroughly and consciously : that 
 their reasonings were to be valued chiefly for their negative 
 results : that in breaking up the ground of old beliefs they 
 did indispensable service as the pioneers of philosophy : and 
 that this clearing of the way, by the application of a shrewd 
 and fearless intellect to all matters sacred and profane, fami- 
 liar and unfamiliar, and that chiefly in the way of question 
 and denial, was a necessary step of progress, as it was cer- 
 tainly the most widely-spread intellectual phenomenon of the 
 generation which immediately preceded Socrates. The differ- 
 ence between him and them, which is left unnoticed here 
 though implied in what follows, — partly because the historical 
 Socrates no longer exactly squared with Plato's ideal, — is that 
 the Sophist disputes as if he knew; Socrates asks questions 
 as one desiring to know : the Sophist is contented with de- 
 molishing an opponent's theory, he is not conscious of any 
 further aim ; with Socrates each negative result is valued at 
 once as a liberation of the mind from error, and as a forward 
 step towards the positive apprehension of truth. This union 
 or balance of the positive with the negative "arm," it is 
 Plato's aim in this dialogue to vindicate and preserve. Thus 
 the History of Philosophy, although not endorsing the assump- 
 tion with which Plato sets out, that the common name Sophist 
 must be significant of a common nature, confirms his estimate 
 of the general tendency and common function of those to 
 whom he assigns the name. 
 
 Up to this point all is tentative and uncertain : and the 
 definitions hitherto obtained are phenomenal merely. This is 
 
TO THE SOPHIST. liii 
 
 manifest from their number and variety. For of an object 
 which is fully comprehended there is one adequate definition 
 and only one. In order to come nearer to understanding the 
 Sophist's nature, we take up again the definition which appeared 
 most suggestive, that which described his procedure as contro- 
 versial. This art of controversy or disputation embraces all 
 topics in heaven and earth. And those who admire the 
 Sophist believe him to know all the things about which he 
 disputes. This pretension refutes itself, for omniscience is not 
 given to man. The essence of the Sophist is that he pretends 
 to a knowledge which is unreal. Thus the disguises of our 
 Proteus are stripped off, and we see him in his true colours, 
 neither as a huntsman, nor as a merchant, nor as an intellectual 
 wrestler, nor as a physician of the soul, but as the master of an 
 art of illusion : a juggler, who imposes with the appearance of 
 knowledge on inexperienced minds : just as the painter can pass 
 off his shows for realities on the more thoughtless amongst 
 young children. Hence he belongs to the multifarious class of 
 imitators, or likeness-makers, and, not to dwell at present on 
 the cardinal difficulty which this new notion involves, he is 
 brought once more under a different summum genus. Hitherto, 
 his race has been derived, by different lines, from the art of 
 "getting/'' his origin must now be referred to the art of 
 "making/"' all art having been at first divided into these two 
 branches. " Creation" is Divine and Human, and each of these 
 again is divided according as the thing made is real or only a 
 likeness of what is real. A dream, for instance, is a divinely- 
 made likeness or illusion. A picture may be called a humanly- 
 made dream. Of human likeness-making there are two kinds : 
 one where the likeness is real, the other where the likeness is 
 only apparent and relative to the individual who sees the like- 
 ness. The Sophist's arguments belong to this more shadowy or 
 " phantastic" kind. And here he works not with instruments, 
 but with his own person ; not with knowledge of the things he 
 imitates, namely, justice and virtue, but only having opinion 
 respecting them : not innocently thinking that he knows them, 
 but hiding a guilty consciousness of charlatanry. By pausing 
 here we should include the public speaker, who is the counter- 
 feit of the statesman as the Sophist is of -the philosopher. 
 He, however, imposes on the public in lengthened addresses, 
 
liv INTRODUCTION 
 
 whereas the Sophist's business, as we have already said, is, by 
 brief arguments, to compel individuals to contradict themselves. 
 (281 c — 236 a, 265 a — 268.) The name is thus restricted to 
 the dialectical as distinguished from the rhetorical aspect of the 
 false use of the intellect. This is a distinction which Plato had 
 not always observed : and in treating individual Sophists it 
 was not easy to do so, for the two characters were often com- 
 bined in the same person. Protagoras, for instance, as we learn 
 from Plato's dialogue of that name, professed himself to be 
 equally a master of copiousness and brevity. And Socrates ob- 
 serves in the Gorgias that Sophists and rhetoricians are mixed 
 up together, and know not Avhat to make of one another, nor 
 do other men know what to make of them d . But Plato is here 
 describing the ideal Sophist : and the function of fallacious 
 scientific argument is ideally distinguishable from that of 
 speaking so as to influence the feelings. The word is, how- 
 ever, allowed to regain the more extended application in Polit. 
 291b, 303 c. 
 
 2o0t(TriK?/ is here characterized as a method, and is to philo- 
 sophy what avTiXoyiK-r] is to 8ia\eKTi/c7j, what disputation is to 
 scientific inquiry. It is possible that while restricting the 
 application of the term on one side, Plato here extends it on 
 another beyond the limits of his own habitual use. so as to 
 include some of his own brethren of the Socratic family. He 
 perhaps indicates that the Eristic tendency, which was growing 
 strong by this time amongst the pupils of Euclides of Megara, 
 w r as defective in some of the elements of a true philosophy. 
 The reason for thinking that he means this is not merely the 
 emphatic mention of the art of controversy, which Plato is fond 
 of distinguishing from real inquiry 6 , but the direction of the 
 whole dialogue against the extreme of Eleatic doctrine, on 
 which we know that the Megarian logic w^as based. This 
 hypothesis also accounts for the Sophist being identified with 
 a picture of the cross-examining spirit, which, as Mr. Grote 
 
 a He tells Callicles afterwards (p. Rep. 5, 454 a — c; Phaed. 90 b, 101 e; 
 
 520 a) that the Sophist is superior to Theset. 164 c; Men. 80 e. In this enu- 
 
 the Rhetor, as the lawgiver is to the meration the description of the young 
 
 judge: i.e. the Sophist furnishes the dialecticians in Phileb. 15 d e, should 
 
 Rhetor with ideas and arguments. not be omitted : with which compare 
 
 e The chief passages in which Plato also Rep. 7, 539 b. 
 censures a.vri\oyiK7\ are the following: 
 
TO THE SOPHIST. Iv 
 
 observes, not only resembles Socrates, but resembles no one 
 
 else. For the Megarians followed Socrates in refuting 
 opinions : but departed from him by separating the negative 
 process from the inductive aim, and, in directing their method 
 to the resolution of phenomena, and the establishment by this 
 means of an abstract being, or goodness, or thought, returned 
 partially to the dogmatism of Zeno. 
 
 There are a few detached points which it will bo well to 
 notice before we turn from this frame-work of satirical defini- 
 tion to the larger and more dialectical portion of the dialogue. 
 
 1 . Though the Sophist is of course an artist and a man of 
 science (for the definition proceeds through a classification 
 of the sciences), yet the science of learning and knowing (to 
 IAadinxa.TiK.bv — elbos 6\ov tG>v tz\vG>v koX to tt\s yv(ap[a€u>s) is the 
 only heading of those introduced at first, viz.; 
 
 (rtoirjTLKr) — k 7-7777/07 
 
 r— ; -i -^ t n 
 
 [xadrnxaTLKi] Kal )^pr]p.aT- aycov- 6r]pevT- 
 
 yvcopiaTiKrj laTiKij kttlkti <- k v)') 
 
 under which no attempt is made to bring him. This touch 
 of satire can hardly be unintentional. 
 
 2. The variety of definitions to which we are led by the 
 process of dichotomies when applied to the Sophist, not only 
 shews that his nature is difficult to grasp, but also proves the 
 method to be one-sided and inadequate. The angler, an artist, 
 by the way, who is known to Homer (Od. 4, 369), has easily 
 a place assigned him, because the conception of his art, when 
 analysed, is not found to contain elements which are imper- 
 fectly known. But the activity of the Sophist is complex and 
 various ; and when the principle, on which his other traits 
 depend, is at last found, this leads the way to difficulties, 
 which the process of mere logical distinction is powerless to 
 resolve. And this for two reasons : because the difficulty lies 
 in that notion of absolute difference on which the method itself 
 rests; and because for the solution of the difficulty there is 
 required the complementary notion of combination, commu- 
 nion, correlation : which division cannot dispense with indeed 
 (since the members of each division are unities and general 
 forms), but throws into the background. AtaKptriK?) needs to 
 be supplemented by avyi<piTu<ij : the StaXeicriKos only knows 
 
lvi [NTRODUCTION 
 
 when and how. Hence it is farther necessary to examine how 
 the two great categories <>f sameness and difference, on which 
 this double process depends, arc related to each other in their 
 most abstract form f . 
 
 3. The idea of purification, connected here with the Elen- 
 chus, or negative dialectic, and in the Politicus with the banish- 
 ment of offending members from the state (this being a political 
 as the former was a mental purgation), though in both places 
 illustrated from the art of medicine, probably originated in 
 the mysteries and was derived by Plato from a Pythagorean 
 source. Compare the KaOapixoC of Empedocles, and see pp. 
 80-82 of the Phasdo. It may be noticed that, in the Phaedo, 
 the notion of impurity is associated with all that is sensible 
 and bodily, as contrasted with the ideal : in these dialogues 
 the evils deprecated are falsehood in the mind and wickedness 
 in the state, which are only mythically identified with the 
 corporeal element, and purification is the separation of the evil 
 from the good. 
 
 4. The comprehension under one heading of the processes 
 of dialectic, pharmacy, ablution, scouring, sweeping, and even 
 clothes-brushing, gives rise to the remark that scientific method 
 ignores all those distinctions of worth, respectability, triviality, 
 and baseness, which rest on feeling and habit, and looks only 
 on those resemblances and differences which are acknowledged 
 by Reason. This may be compared with the saying of Parme- 
 nides to the youthful Socrates, that when philosophy has taken 
 hold of him as it will one day take hold, he will no longer have 
 regard to the opinions of men, but will view all things, however 
 vulgar or base, in the light of Universal Forms. On this point 
 enough has perhaps been said in the notes. But there is some- 
 thing extremely characteristic of the spirit of these dialogues, 
 in the mixture of scientific calmness and ironical satisfaction 
 with which the high things of this world are thus brought to 
 the level of the meanest s. 
 
 f See the passage of the Politicus is only partially applicable. 
 (285 d) where the argument from ex- S Compare the treatment of rhetoric 
 
 ample is vindicated on the ground that in the Gorgias as coordinate with cook- 
 
 the highest subjects have no analogies ing, and in the Euthydemus as a de- 
 
 which are immediately palpable, to partment of magic (rrjs twv incpSiov 
 
 sense. It is to such as these that T6X"??s). 
 classification as a method of definition, 
 
TO THE SOPHIST. Ivii 
 
 5. The form of evil from which deliverance is effected by 
 refutation deserves a passing notice, although the thought is 
 one of the most familiar to readers of Plato : the greatest igno- 
 rance, i. e. ignorance which the mind mistakes for knowledge. 
 So the false statesmen are said to have the greatest ignorance 
 of the greatest of all subjects, in that they are ignorant of 
 statecraft, when they think they are most certainly informed 
 of this h . And in the analysis of the ridiculous, in the Philebus, 
 the same bad eminence is given to the conceit of knowledge 1 . 
 (See also Legg. 9, 863 c.) Yet in the conclusion of this 
 dialogue it would seem as though unconscious ignorance were 
 the less culpable ; for the Sophist is denned as having a guilty 
 suspicion that all is not right within. The inconsistency of 
 these two views does not seem to be noticed by Plato, who 
 would probably, however, have said, if he had been taxed with 
 it, ' that he meant by conscious ignorance, the ignorance of one 
 desirous to know/ 
 
 Still, the notion of a state of ignorance acquiesced in, not- 
 withstanding a suspicion that it exists, is hardly reconcileable 
 with the Socratic principle, which is here made the ground 
 of the Socratic cross-examination, that no soul is willingly 
 ignorant of anything. 
 
 The more practical view, which is'turned to the disadvantage 
 of the Sophist as an " ironical mimic," belongs to the later 
 phase of Platonism. See the passage in the ninth book of the 
 Laws, already quoted, where an attempt is made to reconcile 
 the theory that injustice is never voluntary, with legislation 
 for the exemption from punishment of involuntary crime k . 
 
 6. Plato's later manner may also be detected in the grave 
 digression, suggested by the logical distinction of the Art of 
 Making into Divine and human, in Avhich it is solemnly 
 asserted that the world was made by God in accordance with 
 Reason, and not by the spontaneous working of Nature or 
 Chance. The tone of this passage closely resembles that of 
 the tenth book of the Laws : where the persuasive demon- 
 stration, the koyos juera ttciOovs avaynaias here spoken of, is 
 applied to an imaginary case. The strong reprobation in 
 which the opposite view is held, and the moral and religious 
 fervour with which the answer of Theastetus is received, are 
 
 h Polit. 302 a. ! Plrileb. 48 e. 1: Laws, 861-S64. 
 
 i 
 
lviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 in keeping with the impressive solemnity and earnestness of 
 Plato's latest writings. (Sec especially Legg. 10, 889.) 
 
 II. In defining the Sophist as an illusory controversialist, 
 we seem to have caught him in our net; hut we only seem to 
 have caught him : for hy his controversial art he will prove 
 that our net is non-existent, and as we are allowed no weapons 
 hut arguments, to he refuted is to fail. However shameless 
 it may appear for a controversialist, who is daily detecting 
 falsehood, to say that falsehood is impossible, he will use this 
 argument in self-defence, and we must meet his logic with a 
 higher logic or give up the battle. Our object will not merely 
 be to refute him, for that would be after all only a controver- 
 sial victory like his, but to throw fresh light upon the whole 
 question which his art confuses, — that of the nature and cor- 
 relation of the affirmative and negative elements in thought, 
 or, according to the more objective mode of conception which 
 Plato still preserves, of Being and Not- Being. 
 
 Thus we are led at once to the most abstract form of the 
 inquiry, the nature of the negative idea ; even the relation of 
 this idea to a subject being through the greater part of the 
 discussion left out of view. The Sophist is accused of making 
 a false impression. But to speak of false impressions is to assert 
 an existence which is in the same breath denied — to predicate 
 reality of the unreal. Is this possible ? That depends on the 
 meaning of the word not, and of the word existence, and their 
 relation to each other. This question has a double bearing on 
 the Sophist, of whose definition we are in search. If it is 
 proved that this combination of existence and non-existence is 
 possible, he exists, but his foundation is insecure, for his con- 
 troversial art is based on the absolute mutual exclusion of these 
 alternatives. If on the other hand his art is sound, he escapes 
 refutation, but only by proving his own non-existence. There 
 is hardly to be mistaken in the dialogue this twofold refer- 
 ence, which is not a little perplexing to the modern reader, 
 a reference on the one hand to the problem of the existence 
 of phenomena, one of the deepest of all to Plato, and, on the 
 other, to the oppositions of false science, that " last decom- 
 position of the reason, which consisted in separating everything 
 from all things 1 ." Yet both this error and that difficulty 
 1 Soph. 259 e. 
 
TO THE SOPHIST. lix 
 
 arc included in the sweeping generalization of the fxrj 6v, and 
 both are met by the new formula of the Relativity of Negative 
 Expressions. This has also a bearing, as Plato did not fail 
 to discover, on the method of logical divisions. Duaresis 
 cannot be safely used apart from Synagoge. Classes mutually 
 exclusive are still to be viewed in their relations to each other. 
 The mind must not be dazzled by difference, so as to overlook 
 resemblance, nor by resemblance, so as to neglect true differ- 
 ences. By a resuscitation of the Heraclitean principle in the 
 world of mind, it is again found that the objects of thought are 
 held asunder and together at once (pLacjjepojxevov ael avixcpe- 
 perat). And thus the notion of Being is not less modified than 
 the notions of Appearance and the Negation of Being. For 
 Being can be no longer held as a mere Absolute, but stands 
 related to Not-Being, which it differs from, and yet includes. 
 Here also it appears to the modern reader as if conceptions, 
 which are to him radically distinct, are blended, not to say 
 confused. For Being seems to be conceived at once logically, 
 as the positive in thought and speech, and metaphysically, as 
 an " hypostatized" idea. 
 
 But in order to enter into Plato's meaning, it is necessary to 
 study his position in this dialogue, as he has in some measure 
 enabled us to do, historically. 
 
 The fallacies which we find satirized in the Euthydemus are 
 chiefly of two kinds ; in one of which all resemblance or analogy 
 is supposed to imply identity and to exclude the notion of 
 difference, while in the other all difference is conceived as 
 absolute difference, exclusive of all resemblance and relation : 
 ' If I know one thing, I know all things, for I cannot know 
 and not know ; ' ' If Zeus is my God, he is mine to do what I 
 please with him ; ' ' That which is different from the idea of 
 beauty cannot be beautiful,'' and so on. And thus all propo- 
 sitions except identical propositions are declared impossible, a 
 theory which Aristotle imputes to the followers of Antisthenes. 
 Another paradox, which is likewise attributed to the Cynic, 
 appears in the same dialogue, — the impossibility of negative 
 argument {\xr] zlvai avTikeyziv). The above is a humorous 
 picture of the same notions with which Plato deals seriously in 
 the present dialogue. That the same cannot be different, nor 
 the different the same; that predication is impossible, that is, 
 i 2 
 
Ix INTRODUCTION 
 
 there can be no relation between different ideas; above all, 
 that falsehood cannot bo disproved, for that to deny existence, 
 while naming existence, involves a contradiction in terms, — 
 these are in substance the very theories which Plato here 
 undertakes to modify. Now in accounting for these aberra- 
 tions of thought, to say that the Organon did not yet exist, is 
 to state what, though true and important to remember, docs 
 not afford a sufficient explanation — aArjOcs \iiv, ovQlv be aa^h. 
 It is true that in the shape in which they then appeared, 
 they could have no strength now. But their strength then 
 lay in a mode of thought, which prevailed very extensively 
 in that age, and which had exercised a more powerful 
 influence over Plato himself than any other except that of 
 Socrates ; a mode of thought derived in great part uncon- 
 sciously from the philosophy of Parmcnides and the dialectic 
 of Zeno : the same which appears in such assumptions (familiar 
 to the student of the Thesetetus) as that Socrates ill is a 
 different man from Socrates well (Theset. 159 b), and that 
 everything must be either known or not known by the mind 
 (lb. 188 a). This may be described as the tendency to view 
 every subject in the light of abstract alternatives : to apply 
 the language of logic immediately to the sensible world : to 
 reject as matter of fact that which cannot at once be formu- 
 lated as an idea. This " disease," as we can imagine him to 
 have called it, Plato here traces to its origin in the teaching 
 of Parmenides, and thus redeems the promise made by 
 Socrates in the Theaetetus, there not fulfilled, to examine the 
 deep wisdom of this man : the greatest of those who uphold 
 the indissoluble unity of Being. (Theaet. 183 e.) In doing so, 
 he not only confutes others who had pushed the tendency in 
 question to an extreme, (he rather uses them as a beacon to 
 indicate where the truth does not lie,) but, what is of more 
 importance, develops further, or at least defines more clearly, 
 his own central point of view. For he also had yielded to the 
 charm of " the Eleatic Palamedes" and had held Parmenides 
 " in reverence and awe:" nor had the dominance of this idea 
 been merely logical, but had amounted to a speculative convic- 
 tion, may we not even say, a theological belief? 
 
 We cannot tell whether this impression had at all been 
 derived from Socrates, whom he has represented as meeting 
 
TO THE SOPHIST. Ixi 
 
 with the philosopher in early youth. Socrates may have 
 spoken of Parmenides, as he did of Heraclitus, though his 
 own work in philosophy was independent of all influence from 
 without. At all events it is quite possible that even during 
 the time of his converse with Socrates, Plato may have been 
 attracted towards the Eleatic School. His master's influence 
 was unobtrusive, not hindering the accretion of ideas from all 
 sides, and only after his death would be found to "comprehend 
 all other." It was probably at a still earlier time that Plato's 
 interest and curiosity was excited by the fine discourses and 
 immense popularity of Protagoras and Gorgias ; and it is 
 certain, on the authority of Aristotle, that his first deep draught 
 of philosophy had been received from Cratylus, who taught 
 him the Heraclitean doctrine that " all was motion." This 
 theory, as then held by the enthusiasts of Ephesus, whom 
 Plato has satirized, was the secondary and less noble phase of 
 a great thought — that all which abides eternally is a universal 
 ever-active Law of Becoming. Heraclitus was no materialist. 
 " Matter" had no existence for him, and he denied the separate 
 existence of all " Form" except the Highest Law, whose Per- 
 manence is Perpetual Energy. In the hands of his followers, 
 however, the assertion of this universal law seems to have 
 degenerated into a mere doctrine of the relativity of particular 
 being. And here the Eastern theorists were met by Zeno, 
 who in support of the Eleatic faith in One Sole Being, proved 
 that all relative existence was self-contradictory and inconceiv- 
 able by Reason. Time and Motion, into which the sensible 
 universe had already been resolved, were themselves annihi- 
 lated. The movement of the intellect, by which this defensive 
 negative process was effected, was the first conscious dialectic, 
 the germ of much in Plato and of more in Aristotle, and, in 
 conjunction with the Socratic Elenchus, the direct parent of 
 the method which in this dialogue, and somewhat differently 
 in the Parmenides, is turned against the hypothesis of the 
 simple absoluteness of Being™. But however important logi- 
 cally, the philosophy of Zeno, like that of Cratylus, while more 
 definite, was also narrower than that of his master. He had 
 
 m The Zenonian method is " parri- iartv el Kal evriv, aKard\7]Trrov av- 
 cidally" turned against the Eleatic Opdi-Ktf ei Kal KaraX^wrdv, avsp^uiVTov 
 doctrine in the thesis of Gorgias : ovdev Kal aSie^riy^Tou reus WAas. 
 
Ixii INTRODUCTION 
 
 descen led from metaphysics to logic, and in endeavouring 
 to linkl the Absolute against all comers had assumed an atti- 
 tude which was purely negative, and had adopted a method 
 which, though of great significance, was merely abstract, and 
 not directly applicable to the solution of any real problem. 
 
 Plato, however, had " risen to the height of the great argu- 
 ment/'' and had felt, not only the dialectical might of Zeno, 
 but the transcendental sublimity of Parmenides. It is possible 
 that he may have derived some of his own most famous 
 imagery from the opening lines of the poem on the Nature of 
 Things, where the philosophic impulse is represented as a car 
 drawn by swift steeds, and the philosopher as the comrade 
 of immortal charioteers. Be that as it may, a modern reader 
 can hardly imagine the effect which the impressive lines of 
 Parmenides must have produced on the mind of Plato, when 
 already convinced by Cratylus of the utter changeableness of 
 " all that seems/'' Something analagous may have been ex- 
 perienced by individual students of Spinoza, Kant, or Hegel ; 
 but philosophical belief in modern times presents for the most 
 part but a faint image of the heaven of contemplation into 
 which Plato must have been carried away on hearing reiterated 
 with the eloquence of energetic faith, and proved as a neces- 
 sary truth of Reason, the absolute Existence of One Being, 
 inseparable from thought, equable, unchangeable, without 
 beginning and without end, with no past or future, but an 
 everlasting Now ; however apparently discrete, yet really con- 
 tinuous or omnipresent, so that differences of space are done 
 away as completely as differences of time ; whence phenomenal 
 distinctions of all kinds, relation, change, beginning, ending, 
 time, space, motion, are thrust out of sight or are seen to 
 vanish away. 
 
 This intellectual movement, by which we suppose Plato to 
 have been affected, was confirmed, but also gradually modified, 
 by his contemplation of the work of Socrates. In reflecting 
 on the manner and substance of that wonderful endless talk, 
 and on the ruling motive of that unswerving life, he saw the 
 elements of all previous speculation brought into antagonism 
 and yet into immediate relation with the common thoughts and 
 common life of men, — to whose mental and political state the 
 issue of that antagonism had given a deep and bitter interest. 
 
TO THE SOPHIST. Ixiii 
 
 Before the cross-questioning of Socrates, which brought men 
 to know the vanity of their own knowledge, the most fixed 
 opinions were seen first to waver, and then to disappear. This 
 Plato associated with the changeableness of phenomena ac- 
 cording to Heraclitus; which viewed subjectively becomes the 
 relativeness of sense, according to the doctrines of Protagoras 
 and Aristippus : a relativeness which at the touch of negative 
 dialectic, such as that of Zeno, is reduced to nothingness. 
 
 But the result of the method of Socrates was not merely 
 negative. His aim was to define, that is, to lay bare the one 
 conception which belongs universally and unalterably to each 
 subject of inquiry. Tn such a conception, if it were found, his 
 mind would gladly rest. This is well expressed by Aristotle, 
 who says that Socrates was the first who checked the aimless 
 career of thought, and fixed the mind on Definition : irpdorov 
 Trepl opcaixovs emoT^a-avTos tjjv hiavoiav. Now there is here 
 implied a new and independent assertion of the Absolute ; for 
 the endeavour of Socrates had no meaning, if the " Know- 
 ledge" which he sought were less than the knowledge of that 
 which is always and everywhere true ; if the ignorance of which 
 he accused himself and convinced others, were ignorance only 
 of the relative, the transient, or the phenomenal. But this 
 Absolute of Socrates differs from that of Parmenides in two 
 important respects. 
 
 i. The Substance or Reality of which he speaks is not 
 asserted as if known, but sought for as still unknown. The 
 Existence of Being, which Parmenides asserted with so much 
 vehemence, is taken for granted, and the mind is called away 
 from the absorbing contemplation of this truth to the consi- 
 deration of a new problem, which may be thus stated gene- 
 rally : " What is Being ? or What is the form of Being ?" The 
 change of mental attitude expressed in these few words, — from 
 asserting "Being is" to asking "What is Being?" is of the 
 highest importance ; for without the consciousness which is 
 here evolved, that knowledge is a synthesis of a less general 
 with a more general notion, the growth of science would have 
 been arrested. Philosophers would have been contented with 
 either assigning universality to some particular thing, or, like 
 the Eleatics, excluding the particular from cognition. 
 
 2. Further, he did not ask the question in this merely 
 
Ixh INTRODUCTION 
 
 abstract form: he implied an absolute standard of truth and 
 good; but, as the word "good" reminds us. his inquiries had 
 an immediate bearing on the life of men. Hence, instead of 
 attempting at once to solve the problem, " What is Being V 
 lie sought to determine " What is righteous, what is un- 
 righteous, what is a state, what is the true statesman, what 
 is government, what is it to be fit to govern?" The solution 
 of these problems was approached by what Bacon would have 
 called a process of exclusions, through a series of hypotheses, 
 which were successively modified or relinquished when in some 
 case not found to apply to the subject of definition. And while 
 things commonly confused were thus distinguished, things 
 commonly distinguished (e. g. folly and madness) were not less 
 unexpectedly combined. 
 
 3. The personal attributes of Socrates enhanced this union of 
 the universal with the particular, and of the abstract with the 
 concrete, in his method of talk. The eye that was fixed on 
 the unchangeableness of truth and right, was the same which 
 pierced through and through the follies of his contemporaries ; 
 the lofty soul had a cynical exterior, the widest generalizations 
 were hidden beneath the meanest instances, the imperturbable, 
 urbane, ironical demeanour, helped to bring the dry light of 
 reason into continual, immediate contact with the infinite 
 anomalies of opinion and action; the strange being, unlike 
 all other men, had a direct, unmistakeable influence on almost 
 all. By contrast with him the hollowness of all pretence, espe- 
 cially in other teachers, was clearly seen, while his example 
 gave the appearance of meanness to those who taught for pay. 
 Yet he was the first to admit their individual excellences and 
 accomplishments ; while in conversation with him their real 
 characteristics, their strength as well as their weakness, were 
 most truly manifested. 
 
 Thus with Socrates began a philosophic movement which 
 in some elements was kindred to the Eleatic, but radically 
 different in others ; — kindred, because vindicating by the refu- 
 tation of falsehood an ideal truth; different, because inductive 
 in method, and practical as well as speculative in ultimate aim 
 — identifying truth with good. 
 
 But in continuing and interpreting this movement, Plato at 
 first dwelt consciously rather on the former than the latter 
 
 
TO THE SO I'll 1ST. Kv 
 
 aspect of Socratic thought; rather on the absolute contrasl 
 between the actual state of human opinion and the ideal of 
 Knowledge, than on the nature of Knowledge as implying a 
 relation of the mind to " Being," or of the Universal to the 
 Particular. This, as may be gathered indirectly from this dia- 
 logue, was partly due to the prevalence of the Elcatic impulse 
 ■ — the conviction, namely, of the incommunicable perfection of 
 abstract Being, the sole object of Knowledge or true thought: 
 but partly also to the general law by which belief always 
 precedes criticism. The problem of the post-Socratic philo- 
 sophy for those who did not hold with Antisthenes that Defi- 
 nition was merely nominal, was, granting the possibility of 
 Knowledge and the existence of general forms, i. What is 
 Knowledge 1 2. What are the dbrj ? And, from the objective 
 character of the Greek philosophy, the first of these two ques- 
 tions was chiefly, although not wholly, studied in the light of 
 the second. In other words, the effort of Socrates was to find 
 the etSos of man, justice, temperance, &c; that of his followers 
 was to find the nature of the etSo? generally. But, just as the 
 Existence of Being was asserted, before any one thought of 
 asking, What is Being ? so, in entering on this new stage of 
 thought, Plato believes in Knowledge and the Ideas before he 
 examines them, and his dialectic is for a time coloured with a 
 haze of imagination. He is at first contented with declaring 
 that Knowledge is the only real ground of virtue, and that 
 accordingly all virtue is essentially one. Presently a question 
 rises about the Origin of Knowledge — How can Knowledge 
 have a beginning ? For how can a man inquire into what he 
 does not know ? How are we to conceive the transition from 
 ignorance to certainty ? This question is answered, as Plato 
 elsewhere answers questions which are not ripe for solution, 
 mythically. We learn by recollection, as appears from the 
 lessons of geometry where the teacher leads the pupil to draw 
 forth from his own mind what the moment previously he did 
 not know. Thus the "Eristic" objection is removed, that a 
 man cannot inquire about either what he knows or what he 
 does not know: and the anticipation of poetry and prophecy, 
 that we are immortal beings, is confirmed. To learn is to 
 awaken slumbering knowledge. " The Soul has been every- 
 where and has seen all things, and therefore must have known 
 k 
 
Ixvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 ail things before coming hither: and if she can recover one 
 thing only, there is hope that she may by courageous efforts 
 regain the rest." (Men. 81 c.) By this hypothesis the true 
 objects of knowledge arc relegated to another world than this 
 and to a previous life. The objects of sense remind us of them 
 through a process of association. (Phaedo.) These Eternal 
 Forms the Soul beheld in her first flight, ere she lost her 
 wings, when the impulse of the higher love carried her amongst 
 immortal chariots, beyond the visible sphere, into the plain 
 of truth, where Beauty, Justice, Temperance, Wisdom, dwell 
 eternally, not as they are imagined but as they are known. 
 (Phaadr.) 
 
 This is the poetical mode of conceiving of the ideas, in 
 which Plato embodied the feelings of wonder and delight with 
 which he contemplated the first real inquiry which the world 
 had seen. The object and end of that inquiry appeared to 
 him surrounded with a mystic halo, — like his own image of 
 Beauty, lightening from a transcendent height, — annihilating 
 and making worthless the shadows which surround us here. 
 
 But Plato was far from resting in this as a final theory 
 of Knowledge. His belief in immortality and pre-existence 
 remained, it is true ; but did not supersede other inquiries con- 
 cerning the ideas, which were wholly independent of such a 
 theory, and proceeded simply by experience and reflection. 
 Thus in the Republic, the vision of the ideas in their purity, 
 without help from sense, is the goal towards which the mind is 
 allowed to climb up the ladder of hypotheses, and although we 
 hear of an intellectual region, the context shews this language 
 to be metaphorical, rather than mythological as in the Phsedrus 
 and Phsedon. The line is still drawn sharply and broadly be- 
 tween Being as the object of knowledge and Not-Being as the 
 object of ignorance ; but, first, an intermediate state, having for 
 object the changeable, which is and is not, is crudely imagined, 
 and, at a later period of the discussion (bk. vii.), the succes- 
 sive steps by which the mind rises from the lowest ignorance 
 to the highest knowledge are supplied. No mention is made 
 of recollection, unless we count as such the mythical account of 
 Lethe in bk. x. ; and immediately after the allegory of the cave, 
 in which the sensible has been represented as the copy of the 
 ideal world, we have a piece of psychological analysis, in which 
 
TO THE SOPHIST. lxvii 
 
 tho idea is spoken of as the universal element evolved by 
 Reason from the impressions of Sense. " Intelligence is called 
 in to determine between the contrarieties of sense. I see two 
 fingers, one large the other small. Sight gives me opposite im- 
 pressions respecting objects which are alike. But sight cannot 
 answer the questions which the mind cannot but ask hereupon. 
 Is this puzzling impression one, or two ? If two, then each is 
 one, and so on. Thus intelligence distinguishes between great 
 and small, which in the sensation of vision were confused. 
 And then only are we induced to ask the question which 
 reason suggests,, ' What is the nature of greatness and small- 
 ness?' The ideas thus distinguished are objects of Reason, 
 the former confused impression was received through sight." 
 (vii. 534.) 
 
 Such a relation between intelligence and sensation is ac- 
 knowledged even in the Phsedrus, in the midst of the mythical 
 description of the Plain of Truth : Aei yap avOpuirov avviivai 
 k<xt ethos Xeyo'pevov, e/c ttoW&v lov alaOijcreodv ets €V Aoyic-ju<3 
 gwaipovixevov : though it is immediately added, " Now this is 
 recollection of what the mind has seen in a previous state." 
 
 In both these passages the mind is seen to approach the dbrj 
 through reflection on the experience of sense. The same notion 
 is still more clearly expressed in the Theaetetus (184, 5) : " We 
 speak commonly of seeing with the eye, hearing with the ear, 
 and so forth : but in truth it is with the mind that we see and 
 hear, and feel and taste, and smell. The mind receives these 
 particular impressions through the organs of the different senses. 
 (Cf. Phileb. 33 c.) But there are some things which the mind 
 perceives without any such corporeal aid. These are not par- 
 ticular but universal. For instance, the mind receives through 
 touch an impression of softness from a soft thing, of hardness 
 from a hard thing. But when the mind says this is hard, a 
 new element arises, viz. the Being of the hardness, which is 
 perceived, not through any of the senses, but by the mind 
 alone, and the Idea of hardness is then first perceived. Fur- 
 ther, that hardness and softness are opposed and that the 
 opposition between them is real, these and the like thoughts 
 the mind herself determines, when she reviews and compares 
 the impressions which she has received through the senses." 
 The idea, then, in this, which may be termed the psychological 
 k 2 
 
Ixviii [NTR0D1 CTICXN 
 
 aspect, is that unity which the mind seeks amidst the variety of 
 sensible impressions, distinguishing what is confused in sense, 
 
 and uniting scattered phenomena in one conception : the uni- 
 versal clement; which is latent in the mind's first impression 
 of each object, and. is disengaged by reflection to he contem- 
 plated by reason. The right performance of this process is 
 the secret of method : " to unite and divide in thought accord- 
 ing to natural forms, that is, according to the reality of things, 
 not mangling the victims like a bad sacrificer." (Phaedr. 265 e.) 
 It is in connection with this logical or dialectical process that 
 the word eI5os is most frequently used by Plato. 
 
 The ideas are now seen as objects of intelligence, which 
 remain unchanged, while the sensations through which the 
 mind is awakened to perceive them are perpetually giving 
 place to new and perhaps opposite impressions. (See Cratyl. 
 440.) Each is separated from the phenomena through which 
 it was at first recognized, in an isolation like that of the Eleatic 
 Being, as the absolute in which the relative is done away : the 
 avvTToOcTov, independent of external support ; the universal 
 absorbing the particular. But here several difficulties arise. 
 
 1. How is the absoluteness of Knowledge reconcileable with 
 the possibility of error ? For if everything is either known or 
 unknown, how can that which is unknown be in any way the 
 object of belief? Hence the hypothesis in Rep. bk. v. of "that 
 which is and is not" as the object of opinion, and the elaborate 
 airopiai of the Thesetetus, where it is attempted to account for 
 error by imagining thought as a process between sensation 
 and memory, or between memory and memory. A nearly 
 parallel difficulty is put in the Parmenides. If there is no 
 relation between the perfect and the imperfect, man cannot 
 know the ideas, nor can the divine mind be cognizant of human 
 thoughts. 
 
 2. How can the universal be absolute and yet embrace par- 
 ticulars ? This or a cognate difficulty is raised in the Theae- 
 tetus, where it is found impossible to distinguish the whole 
 from the sum of the parts : the same airopia is explicitly stated 
 in the Philebus, where it is asked, how can One exist in many 
 and yet be One ? — and in the Parmenides, through the illus- 
 tration of the sail, which covers many men, but covers each 
 only by a part of itself. The notion of ij.46e£ts, which Socrates 
 
TO THE SOPHIST. Ixix 
 
 introduces in the Parmenides, only creates new difficulties, but 
 something approaching a rational solution appears in the 
 Philebus, where Number is seen to mediate between Unity 
 and Infinity. 
 
 3. Granting the existence of abstract ideas of resemblance, 
 difference, justice, beauty, good ; shall we say that the idea of 
 man, or fire, or water, or, still more, of mud, dirt, hair, exist 
 absolutely 11 ? (Parm.) 
 
 4. Must not ideas be related to one another? For is not 
 dialectic, and even language, a movement or process between 
 ideas? Nay, if the idea is the cause of phenomena, must 
 there not be a principle of life or movement inherent in each 
 idea ? In the Eepublic, for example, the operations of science 
 are conceived as a movement along the chain of true ideas, a 
 way upwards and downwards which is the same. And at the 
 head of this nexus of dhr] is the form of Good, which in some 
 way unexplained is the cause of Being and of Knowledge. In 
 the Philebus also there is imagined a process between the limit 
 and the unlimited, the one and the many, and a cause of this 
 process is supposed. And in the Timaeus the Creator prepares 
 for his work by welding together opposite ideas. Thus the 
 Sophist and Parmenides are not the sole response in Plato to 
 the challenge of Socrates, " I should admire any man who 
 could shew that Resemblance, Difference, Plurality, Unity, 
 Motion, Rest, admitted of composition and division {h kavroh 
 Tavra bwafxeva (rvyKtpavvvcrQai kcli biaKptveadai . . . tt\v avTr\v 
 TavTrjv airopiav ev avrols T06S eiSecri TTavTobcnr&s TrXeKoixivqv . . . 
 emSeTcfou. Parm. 129 e). 
 
 5. If the idea, as Socrates urges when pressed by Par- 
 menides (lb. 132 b), is a conception of the mind, yet that con- 
 ception must have an object, and Knowledge is in some way a 
 process between subject and object , in which, if the mind is 
 active, the object of Knowledge must be conceived as passive. 
 In this way also the Eternal Form is brought back from the 
 
 n When Plato makes Parmenides eKacrrov rrjs (pvcreais aipacrdcu w wpocrriKei 
 
 remark on this, "Philosophy has not tyvxys icpdirrreadaL rov toiovtoV irpo<r- 
 
 yet acquired her final hold on you," rjKei Ss £vyytve?' u> -nXriffidaas /ecu /j-iyels 
 
 he is perhaps covertly satirizing the t<3 ovti ovtqos, yevprjeras vovv koX aArj- 
 
 thoroughness of the Megarian logic. deiav, yvoit) re km. a\r)6cos {wtj «ai rpe- 
 
 See Rep. 6, 490 b. Xlplv ab-rov $> sgtiv (poiro, /cot ovtoo A.17701 coSlvos, irplv 8' ov. 
 
Ixx INTRODUCTION 
 
 fruitless isolation in which it has been placed by the first 
 efforts of purely abstract thought ; and the reflection rises that 
 Perfect Being must include the attributes of consciousness and 
 life, and therefore, in a certain sense, of motion. (Soph. 248.) 
 
 The difficulties which attend the hypothesis of the ideas are 
 at least as clearly stated by Plato as by Aristotle : and his 
 statements have also the advantage of being directed against 
 the phase of the doctrine which he knew and to which he had 
 been himself inclined, and not to the confused Pythagorean 
 fancies of his followers. The question is most clearly enun- 
 ciated in the Theaetetus from the side of Knowledge, and in 
 the Parmenides from the side of Being. But those who re- 
 member the various fertility of Plato's mind will not expect 
 the objections raised in different dialogues to be precisely the 
 same. He never sought to bind the play of thought in a 
 single formula. When it had once occurred to him to criticize 
 the theory of ideas, the problem was sure to be seen by him 
 in changing lights, although the elements of the question 
 remain essentially unaltered. Is each idea one or many, at 
 rest or in motion, isolated or related to others, limiting or 
 limited; is Being inanimate or endowed with life, exclusive 
 of particulars, or how related to them ? Is it possible wholly 
 to separate Knowledge from sense and opinion ? These, if not 
 the same question, form a class of questions, of the reality of 
 which Plato is conscious in some dialogues, but appears wholly 
 unconscious in others (for instance in the Phsedo and Cratylus). 
 The dialogues, besides the Sophist and Politicus, in which the 
 effect of this movement within Platonism in the mind of its 
 founder are most evident, are the Philebus, Timaaus, and Laws. 
 In the Philebus, not only is the difficulty stated at the outset, 
 in the form of the problem how to reconcile the antithesis 
 between the one and many, but the combination and resolu- 
 tion of ideas is elaborately exemplified, and a Cause of their 
 combination in reality is conceived. The earlier part of the 
 Timaeus contains a similar passage, and in both the author has 
 laboured to imagine the mode in which the ideal and corporeal 
 are conjoined. Both anticipate Aristotle in speaking of matter 
 (omeipov, Ti6r\vrj), and of a cause by which form is impressed 
 on matter. The Philebus has also a graduated scale of Know- 
 ledges, in which the knowledge of the particular and concrete, 
 
TO THE SOPHIST. lxxi 
 
 although regarded as " impure/' is deliberately allowed to 
 have a place. And in the Laws, while the dhti are not heard 
 of except as logical forms, and a higher movement (namely 
 that of mind) is imagined as the cause both of rest and motion 
 (10, 895), Plato is vehement in asserting that mind in all its 
 manifestations is prior to the elements and controls them. 
 
 The object of the preceding remarks has been to shew (1) 
 That side by side with the poetical or metaphysical there grew 
 up in Plato's mind a logical mode of conceiving the ideas ; 
 (2) That as he viewed them in this two-fold aspect, and saw 
 the latter of the two more clearly, he became conscious of the 
 difficulties which the theory involved ; and (3) That he was 
 led, partly through the consideration of these difficulties, to 
 alter considerably his theory of Knowledge and Being : pass- 
 ing from the bare assertion of an absolute object of Mind, to 
 which he had been led by interpreting Socrates through 
 Parmenides, towards the Aristotelian conception of logical 
 categories and of Being as composed of Matter and Form by 
 an efficient Cause. 
 
 Turning now to the Sophist, from which we have been too 
 long detained, we find the elaborate treatment of a difficulty, 
 which is allowed to have been occasioned by the exclusiveness 
 of the Eleatic point of view. This difficulty is not, as in the 
 Philebus, how to find a meeting-point between unity and in- 
 finity, but one more abstract still, how to explain the possibility 
 of combining the positive and negative in thought. Philosophy 
 by aspiring to the pure form of Being had become "dark 
 from excess of light ; " had soared beyond the ken of mortals 
 into an unseen heaven; and in "turning away her mind" from 
 that which is not — from the unreal, and therefore from nega- 
 tion—had deprived herself of the only weapon which could be 
 of any avail to her against the spurious counterfeits of herself. 
 She must deny as well as affirm, and she cannot deny without 
 giving a certain place to Not-Being. It has been already said, 
 that the Negative is here viewed in its ultimate abstraction. 
 The distinctions of Aristotle, between xlrevbos, o-repjjerts, and 
 hvva\xi$ or Kara (TviAfiefirjKos, which he employed in criticizing 
 Plato, are certainly not thought of, but neither were they 
 required, at least in the statement of the question. For false- 
 hood is the object or correlative of denial, and both are equally 
 
Ixxii INTRODUCTION 
 
 expressed whenever (he word "not 11 is uttered: and negation 
 " per accidens" must obviously be explained through the 
 theory of simple negation. The question is, does this word 
 " not" imply such absolute severance between the terms which 
 it divides, as to exclude the possibility of any relation between 
 them .' If A is exclusive of B, is B therefore incapable of all 
 communion or combination with At If so, a counterfeit of 
 reality is inconceivable, for it is not reality, and yet partakes 
 of reality in so far as it is really a counterfeit. This question 
 is raised not with respect to individuals, or infimaB species, in 
 which the coexistence of sameness and difference was an ad- 
 mitted fact (Phil. 15 d), but with respect to general ideas, and 
 the most universal of these, beginning with the most compre- 
 hensive of all ideas, viz. that of Being. The " absolute sever- 
 ance/'' which the injunction of Parmenides requires, between 
 that which Is, and that which Is Not, was the origin and type 
 of the spirit " which would separate each thing from every 
 other" (Soph. 259 e); and the correction of this deeply-rooted 
 tendency was necessary in order to make inquiry possible. 
 
 After a statement of the perplexities in which the notion of 
 Not-Being is involved according to the ordinary conception 
 of it as the opposite of Being, shewing that it is inconceivable 
 either as a predicate or as a subject, or as the object of refuta- 
 tion and denial ; the Stranger expresses his intention, in this 
 desperate case, of attacking the revered authority of Par- 
 menides. This opens the whole question of the Nature of 
 Being, and the theories of previous and contemporary philoso- 
 phers on the subject. And in the course of the inquiry it is 
 found that the notion of Being, according to prevailing views, 
 is no less full of contradictions than that of Not-Being. 
 Amongst the earlier thinkers, those who hold a fixed plurality 
 of Beings must admit that existence is common to all these, 
 and hence whatever number they assert must either be in- 
 creased, or reduced to one. Those who, with Parmenides, 
 believe in the Unity of Being, will find it hard to keep this 
 unity inviolate while they use the terms Being, One, Whole, 
 each with a distinct meaning, and while they admit, as they 
 needs must, that a whole has parts. 
 
 These difficulties are only briefly indicated : the chief criti- 
 cism of Parmenides, or rather the modification of his view, 
 
TO THE SOPHIST. Ixxiii 
 
 which has been promised above, is made indirectly, and only 
 emerges when the contemporary phase of Greek philosophy 
 has been examined in its two chief aspects. 
 
 Here no attempt is made to determine the exact number of 
 Beings. The battle rages about a different point. Is lieing 
 corporeal or ideal? Some hold that nothing exists but bodies, 
 which they can touch and handle : their opponents break up 
 these bodies by dialectic into a flux of change, and assert the 
 sole existence of certain bodiless ideas. 
 
 Now the former, if pressed, and if they were capable of 
 argument, would admit the existence of a soul, and of virtue 
 and vice as attributes of the soul; and, though they might 
 contend that the soul is corporeal, they could hardly maintain 
 this of justice or wisdom. Hence they may be willing to sub- 
 stitute for body as the characteristic of Being, the power of 
 acting or of being acted upon. Being is possibility of energy. 
 
 But the idealists will refuse this definition. Acting and 
 suffering they say are properties not of Being, but of Becom- 
 ing : for Being is exempt from change. Whereupon we ask 
 them whether to know is an active, and to be known a passive 
 verb; and whether Being therefore, so far as known, is not 
 acted upon 1 And here, apart from logic, the reflection rises, 
 that Perfect Being cannot be devoid of life and movement, and 
 the power of thought. That which has thought has life, that 
 which has life has a soul, and that which has a soul cannot be 
 motionless. And yet it is most true that reason could not 
 exist nor come into being without uniformity and permanence, 
 which imply a principle of rest in the object of reason. Being 
 therefore has both Motion and Rest. But Being is neither 
 Motion nor Rest. We are in the position of the dualists whom 
 we compelled to admit a third principle. Motion and Rest are 
 opposites, yet both exist. Being therefore comprehends both, 
 and is different from both, and though essentially partaking 
 both of motion and rest, in its own nature neither rests nor 
 moves. In solving this apparent contradiction, we stumble on 
 the solution of the original problem of the reconciliation of 
 Being and Not-Being. As we endeavour to harmonize the dis- 
 cords which have arisen within the sphere of Being, we are led 
 to modify our notion of the mutual exclusiveness of Being and 
 that which had been hitherto regarded as the opposite of Being. 
 1 
 
Ixxiv INTRODUCTION 
 
 Before proceeding with the argument, we may glance at one 
 or two points in the interesting passage which has just been 
 analyzed. (Soph. 246-250.) 
 
 Under the titles of the Earth-born and the Friends of Ideas 
 docs Plato allude to any particular schools, and, if so, to which 
 of those existing round him ? 
 
 It is difficult to bring either description into exact harmony 
 with the tenets of any single school. The yrjyevels would 
 at first sight appear to be the same who are mentioned in 
 the Thesetetus as " stubborn and repellent" men, but are 
 there emphatically, though somewhat ironically, distinguished 
 from the " disciples of Protagoras :" whereas here the akr]deia 
 of Protagoras appears to be brought under the general censure. 
 It may be remarked, however, that there is a distinction 
 amongst the yrjyeyets also, for some are viewed as more hope- 
 lessly irreclaimable than the rest (01 glvt&v cnraproi re kch avro- 
 Xdoves). According to this view, Antisthenes may possibly be 
 included, but the whole description and the line of argument 
 pursued point rather in the direction of a physical school. 
 The moral maxims of Democritus, when taken in connexion 
 with his general principle, might lay his followers open to the 
 criticism here employed. But on the other hand, his analysis 
 of the senses makes it improbable that he is alone intended. It 
 remains, therefore, most probable that Plato has here idealized, 
 if such a paradox may be allowed, the materialistic tendency in 
 contemporary thought. In the other description, of the friends 
 of motionless forms, there are some marks which answer to 
 the Pythagoreans, and others which point rather in the direc- 
 tion of Megara. That the Pythagoreans, whose djaznjroi ovaiat 
 are very similarly criticized by Aristotle, are intended here, is 
 an opinion which Proclus p takes for granted, and which has 
 been recently advanced, quite independently as it would seem, 
 by a French critic, M. Mallet. That the Megarians are meant, 
 has been the common belief, since this was somewhat doubt- 
 fully asserted by Schleiermacher. The Pythagoreans certainly 
 
 p Comment, in Parmen. p. 149 ed. crofyovs. A comparison of Parmenides, 
 
 Pont. : iiv fiXv yap Kal irapa rots Uv- Philolaus, and Empedocles shews that 
 
 Bayopeiois r/ irepl rwv elda/v Oeoopia Kal the Eleatic and Pythagorean specula- 
 
 5?;Ao7 Kal avrbs ev 2o<pt<rrjj t£i' elSwv tions were kindred in their origin. 
 <pi\ovs •npocrayopfvoov robs if 'IraAf'a 
 
TO THE SOPHIST. Ixx\ 
 
 believed in purely immaterial forms, and the absence of an 
 efficient cause to aid the formal was their weak point. Bui 
 there is no evidence that they brought a subtle dialectic to 
 bear on the resolution of phenomena. This trait (kclto. apuKpa. 
 bcadpavovTes kv rols Koyots) belongs rather to the Megarians : 
 and so does the sharp opposition between the flux of Becoming 
 and the permanence of Being. This is an Elcatic feature. But 
 then although we know that Euclides said that the good was 
 " one called by many names," his reaction towards Elcaticism 
 would probably, though not certainly, incline him to lay the 
 emphasis on " one" rather than on " many/' and we have no 
 evidence (this passage apart) that he admitted a real diversity 
 of forms. This is one of Socher's grounds for supposing that 
 the " Sophist" was written by a Megarian and directed against 
 Plato, whose theory of ideas he imagines to be here directly 
 impugned. We have seen that however much some of Plato's 
 statements (e. g. Orat. 440) may seem to countenance the doc- 
 trine here criticized, such was not his final theory of know- 
 ledge and being. But the hypothesis of Ueberweg and of 
 Mr. Grote, that Plato is here examining a view which he at 
 one time held, is well worth considering. 
 
 We shall only make a slight modification of this hypothesis 
 in expressing our own opinion that Plato at a late period of 
 his course directs this argument against those amongst his 
 disciples in the Academy who, resting in their imperfect 
 realization of an earlier phase of his own teaching and revert- 
 ing to Pythagorean and Eleatic elements, held the doctrine of 
 ideas in the form in which it is often controverted by Aristotle. 
 That Aristotle should not have observed this divergence be- 
 tween the master and the school may be inexplicable, but 
 not more so than his silence about the Parmenides. On this 
 supposition, the avowal of familiar acquaintance with the men 
 (eyeb 8e ttnos bia avvi]9eiav) is not made by the Eleatic Stranger, 
 but by Plato himself, whose close relation to the persons indi- 
 cated accounts for a peculiar gentleness of tone (e. g. ?^epwrepot 
 yap); and the plurality of ideas, their immobility, and the wide 
 gulf between Being and the changing world, are tenets which 
 we clearly know to have been held together by one and the 
 same school. 
 
 This interrogation of the philosophers is one of the earliest 
 U 
 
Ixxvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 chapters in the critical history of philosophy : and approaches 
 to the manner in which Anaxagoras and Empedoclcs are 
 handled by Aristotle, when he endeavours to penetrate to their 
 meaning or inmost tendency through the haze of their lan- 
 guage. There is a similar effort made in the TheaetetuB, in 
 the development of the theory of sense, where Heraclitus and 
 Protagoras are shewn to meet in an unconscious harmony, and 
 the same appears in the allusion to Parmenides and the twofold 
 difficulty of understanding his expressions and his thought (ixrj 
 ovre to, Xeyo^eva £vvi&{j,ev, tC re oiavooviJLevos ei7re ttoXv irkeov Aei- 
 7rw/ae0a). But the conception of studying philosophical ideas 
 in the light of their history, and almost of the impossibility of 
 studying them in any other way, comes more distinctly into 
 consciousness in this passage than even in Aristotle. 
 
 There are several points even in these few pages, besides 
 the criticism of the eibrj, which confirm the hypothesis that the 
 Sophist is a late dialogue. These are chiefly: i. The identi- 
 fication of the Highest Being with Soul or Mind, which appears 
 with equal distinctness only in the Philebus, Timasus, and Laws. 
 2. The abruptness with which this thesis is introduced, not 
 suggested directly by the argument but prompted apparently 
 by a deep emotional impulse. This is in the manner of the 
 Laws. 3. The admission of motion into the intelligible sphere. 
 4. The close union of the ideas of Being and Becoming, which 
 Plato's earlier speculations had divorced. This notion is ap- 
 plied in one place to the Eleatic Whole (245 d, to yevopevov ael 
 yeyovev okov), notwithstanding the fact that Parmenides denied 
 yeveo-is altogether ; and in another place, in immediate con- 
 nexion with the idea of permanence or stability, it is said that 
 this kind is necessary to the production as well as the existence 
 of mind (249 C, avtv tovtmv vovv naOopqs ovto, t) yei'op.ei'ot/ av ;). 
 
 We return to the argument. The notion of perfect being 
 includes the attributes of motion and rest, yet neither of these 
 is the same with Being : Being differs from both, and, qua 
 Being, neither rests nor is moved. Yet it would seem as if 
 everything must either be at rest or in motion. 
 
 Now these contradictions may be solved, if we admit the 
 possibility of a relation or intercommunion between different 
 kinds. If Being subsists in its own nature and at the same 
 time partakes in one respect of rest and in another of motion, 
 
TO THE SOPHIST. lxxvii 
 
 this perplexity is removed. The same question of the correla- 
 tion of ideas or kinds is raised by the simplest instance of pre- 
 dication. Every proposition implies a relation between things 
 which arc not identical. Even this process has been pro- 
 nounced impossible by some, who hold that you cannot say 
 " Man is Good/' but only " Man is Man " and " Good is 
 Good." Not to pass over any class of thinkers, however ex- 
 travagant, we address these belated scholars in common with 
 the rest with the following question. Are all ideas totally 
 disparate, as these say, or do all admit of indiscriminate inter- 
 mixture, or do some enter into relations with each other while 
 others do not ? 
 
 If there is no "communion of ideas," (i) motion and rest 
 cannot exist, for neither can partake of Being ; and the phi- 
 losophy of motion and that of rest are equally undone : and 
 so (2) are the philosophies which rest on the union of one and 
 many, whether these are viewed as alternating or as being 
 always combined, and whether unity or a plurality of elements 
 be made the starting-point. But still more sorry (3) is the 
 plight of the opponents of predication themselves. For they 
 cannot move a step in their own argument without the combi- 
 nation of ideas. 
 
 Again, if there is to be commixture of all ideas, motion 
 could be predicated of rest, and rest of motion. 
 
 It remains that some ideas admit of union and others do 
 not. Just as some letters can be combined in syllables and 
 others cannot. And it may be that as the vowels are present 
 in all syllables, so there may be a select few amongst the ideas 
 whose presence is necessary to every combination. 
 
 But as a science is necessary to determine what combina- 
 tions of letters make syllables, and again another science to 
 distinguish the proper combinations of musical sounds, so a 
 science, namely that of dialectic, is necessary in order to 
 determine the true relations of ideas. The dialectician sees 
 one form traversing a multitude of scattered objects, and 
 several forms embraced in a higher generality : he sees many 
 such wholes bound together in one universal notion, and also 
 many that are wholly sundered from one another. 
 
 In looking for the Sophist, we have unexpectedly stumbled 
 on the philosopher, and we shall know where to look for him 
 
lx.wiii INTRODUCTION 
 
 when it is his turn to be defined. The Sophist hides in the 
 dark cave of Not-Being, wherein he feels his way by the 
 trick of use. We lose the philosopher, " as we lose the lark 
 in heaven," in an abyss of light, where he clings, by the 
 effort of pure reason, to the form of Being. Plato does not 
 expressly notice, what his argument however implies, that the 
 word "Being" is here used in a new sense. The "Being" 
 here spoken of is clearly the object of philosophy, that is of 
 dialectic : and the function of dialectic is to determine which 
 kinds harmonize and which are mutually exclusive. Hence 
 "Being" can be nothing else than the sum or principle of 
 true determinations, whether positive or negative. 
 
 But "Being" was previously reckoned, and is again reckoned 
 (inf. 254 d), with rest and motion as one of the several kinds 
 amongst which the determinations are made. The first notion 
 of Being in the Abstract, on which the Eleatic doctrine was 
 founded, remains side by side with that of Truth, as consisting 
 in the real agreement and disagreement of ideas. The latter 
 seems to be expressed by the word ov in the present passage, 
 which contains the answer to the question raised in p. 250 a, 
 viz. what common quality of opposites is expressed by saying 
 that they both exist. Their common quality is (according to 
 this) that each is really predicable of some other thing. This 
 is almost but not quite expressed inf. 258 b, rj ttjs Oarepov — 
 ovata €<ttiv. 
 
 But to proceed. As it is admitted that communion exists 
 to a greater or less extent amongst different kinds, some for- 
 bidding communion, while some may hold communion with all ; 
 we proceed to apply the dialectic method which is now come 
 into view to the three chiefest kinds, which have been already 
 before us : Being, Motion, Rest. The two latter, as was said 
 above, have no communion : while Being communes with them 
 both. Each of these three is other than the remaining two, 
 but the same with itself. Thus emerge two fresh and distinct 
 kinds, or categories, holding communion with the three already 
 mentioned, but different from them all, the categories of Same 
 and Other. They are certainly both distinct from Rest and 
 from Motion, for if either of these were identical with that in 
 which both participate, they would be obliged to participate 
 in each other, which we have seen to be in the highest degree 
 
TO THE SOPHIST. kxix 
 
 impossible. Nor can Sameness be identified with Being, else 
 in asserting that motion and rest exist, we should assert that 
 they were both the same. Thus are made out four distinct 
 kinds : motion, rest, being, same. The form of Other alone 
 remains. Is this a fifth kind, or are Being and Otherness two 
 names for the same thing ? They are distinct, for this reason, 
 that every Other is always relative to an Other, whereas Beings 
 are sometimes thought of in themselves and sometimes in rela- 
 tion. (Aristotle's category of Relation is here incidentally 
 anticipated.) 
 
 The form of Otherness is therefore a fifth kind ; and, to- 
 gether with that of Sameness, it is found in combination with 
 everything, like the vowels in the illustration from letters. 
 (These two in fact are the positive and negative aspects, which 
 are indissolubly connected in the notion of Being, as defined 
 above.) 
 
 In applying this discovery we find that Otherness is more 
 simply expressed by the word " not." Motion is quite other 
 than Rest ; i. e. is not Rest : — is other than Sameness ; i. e. is 
 not Sameness. Yet Motion is, i. e. exists : and is the same with 
 itself through participation in Sameness. In these different 
 senses or relations, Motion is and is not the same : partaking 
 of Sameness in relation to itself and of Otherness (expressed by 
 the word "not") in relation to sameness. So if motion could 
 partake of rest, it might be said, " Motion is at rest and is not 
 Rest." And it is certainly true that Motion being other than 
 the Other, i. e. partaking of Otherness in relation to the 
 Other, in the same phrase both is and is not Other. Thus 
 Motion is distinct from three of the four kinds, partaking 
 of the Other in relation to each: and it is also distinct 
 from, and partakes of the Other in relation to, Being. But 
 Motion also partakes of Being, and thus both is and is not 
 Being. 
 
 Now this applies equally to every kind. All partake of 
 Being, for they all exist, but each is distinguished from the 
 abstract, or universal, notion of Being. They are and are not, 
 are existent but are not existence. Being and Not-Being are 
 equally predicable of every form. And, if this result is turned 
 the other way, — the form of Being is distinguished from 
 (partakes of Other in relation to) all other forms. Being is in 
 
Ixxx INTRODUCTION 
 
 itself once for all, but is-noi times infinite, viz. in comparison 
 with everything which partakes of being. 
 
 It appears then that Non-Being includes everything except 
 the abstract idea of Being ; and that the word not expresses 
 only otherness or difference, and not necessarily contrariety. 
 The not-greater is not necessarily smaller. Now every posi- 
 tive conception has a corresponding negative, which is not 
 necessarily opposite but only different, and includes a really 
 existing kind. Thus the not-beautiful is a kind by itself. The 
 word " not 11 distinguishes between positive existences ; and 
 the Other has as many branches as science has. 
 
 It follows that negative determinations have as much objec- 
 tive reality as the positive ones which are summed up in 
 Being i : and they signify when taken severally, not the con- 
 tradictory of the corresponding affirmatives, but only some- 
 thing not identical with them. Now the sum of these nega- 
 tions, or of their objects, is no other than the non-existent or 
 unreal, after which the Sophist led us such a dance. 
 
 We have not only established against Parmenides that this 
 Non-Being has a real existence, but we have also laid bare the 
 nature of it as the sum of negations, or of all which falls on 
 the left-hand side in the distinctions of science. 
 
 (Plato here notes a change in the meaning of jut) ov similar 
 to that above noticed in the meaning of ov. The merely ab- 
 stract notion of Nothing seems at first sight contradictory to 
 the merely abstract notion of Being. But when Being is re- 
 cognized as the complex object of the determinations of thought, 
 Not-Being becomes the negative side or aspect of those deter- 
 minations, and is thus a part of being. Moreover every such 
 negative expression, from the nature of the case, since nega- 
 tion is difference and difference always implies relation (to 
 erepov ael npbs trepov), has a positive content.) 
 
 Further, while we have shewn the existence of non-being, 
 we have proved that Being in innumerable relations is not, 
 i. e. is different from, or other than, every existing kind. 
 
 Being and difference (or positive and negative Being 1 ) are 
 two categories (to use a convenient term of later growth) which 
 
 q " Being" is here used with a third r The ideas of to.vtov and ov seem 
 
 variety of meaning = the sum of posi- to run together again, though distin- 
 tive determinations. guished for the sake of argument above. 
 
TO THE SOPHIST. Ixxxi 
 
 traverse all things — even each other, since the Other exists, 
 and Being is other than the remaining kinds, which partake 
 of Being, and of the Other in relation to each other and to the 
 form of Being. 
 
 Here is a nut for the Eristic philosophers to crack. They 
 may exhibit contradictions till they are weary, but until they 
 can refute the preceding argument, they will labour in vain. 
 The dialectician's is a far nobler task, to follow every argument 
 having respect to the relation in which things are compared 
 or distinguished. To insist without this on the contradiction of 
 sameness and difference is mere childishness, as has now been 
 shewn. We have swept the ground from under the feet of 
 the analytical and controversial gentry, by abolishing the 
 absoluteness of distinctions : which indeed was necessary 
 if argument, or even language, is to be maintained at all. 
 For, as has been already shewn in answer to Antisthenes, 
 the nature of proposition rests on the combination of different 
 forms. 
 
 But if language were done away, all our toil would have 
 left us where we were, so far as the Sophist is concerned. 
 For falsity can only be found in propositions, either spoken or 
 silent. Opinion is silent proposition. 
 
 There still remains, therefore, a new problem, after it has 
 been decided that there is a communion amongst several kinds, 
 and that Non-Being is one of these ; viz. Is there communion 
 between Non-Being and the proposition ? Does that which is 
 other than being enter into language ? We must answer this 
 before we can tell whether the Sophist is to be accused of 
 falsehood, and, if the answer is in the negative, we must begin 
 the whole inquiry afresh. 
 
 Thesetetus is cast down by the apparition of this new diffi- 
 culty : but is encouraged to proceed. " Faint heart never took 
 a city. Some progress has been made, and that is more than 
 we at one time expected. And after all not much remains." 
 Speech is then defined as the combination not of nouns with 
 nouns or verbs with verbs, but of nouns and verbs (which are 
 also defined) — just as vowels and consonants were seen to be 
 combined in syllables. 
 
 It is shewn also that every proposition has a subject and 
 is of a certain quality ; by which is meant, not the formal 
 
Ixxxii INTRODUCTION 
 
 difference of affirmative or negative, but the material difference 
 of truth or falsity. 
 
 The false proposition attaches to its subject a predicate, which 
 lias a meaning indeed, but a meaning other than that which 
 consists with fact (oi/rwv — ovra hepa, Soph. 263 b) ; a meaning, 
 therefore, which is the proper object of a negative determi- 
 nation in thought. False speech is the affirmation of this other 
 predicate, which means, not nothing, but a wrong something. 
 (It is of course implied that false negation is the wrong affirma- 
 tion of non-being.) Now thought is a silent dialogue of the 
 mind with herself (cf. Theost. 189 e) : opinion is the positive or 
 negative determination of thought : and imagination is opinion 
 in contact with sense. Hence whatever is essentially true of 
 speech, is also true of thought, opinion and the intellectual 
 element in sensation. False opinion is therefore conceivable 
 and possible. And the phantastic art, in which we placed the 
 Sophist, has more than a chimerical existence. The existence 
 of the said "kind" being vindicated, the division of kinds is 
 resumed from p. 236 c in the manner already indicated, and 
 the dialogue ' ' grows to a point." 
 
 In closing this long introduction, it is still necessary, for the 
 sake of clearness, to make a few remarks on the discussion of 
 which an analysis has been here presented to the reader. 
 
 1. The last step in the argument will be more intelligible 
 when put into modern language. 
 
 It has been shewn that Non-Being is merely the object of 
 negative determination : the form of Difference, coming in be- 
 tween two positive conceptions. Before the existence of false- 
 hood can be established, the question remains, Are thought 
 and speech themselves ever the proper objects of negative 
 determination ? Can a proposition as well as a term be denied ? 
 Does the Form of Difference enter into thought as the object 
 of thought, so as to divide the real (ov in the sense of Truth) 
 from the unreal (jU7j ov— that which is other than the Truth) 
 which still has a certain reality as being really distinguished 
 from the real ? Plato answers this question, as he answers the 
 question in the Theaetetus, " Is true opinion knowledge 1" by 
 an appeal to fact. The proposition, " Theaetetus, with whom I 
 now converse, is flying," is manifestly the legitimate object of 
 
TO THE SOPHIST. Ixxxiii 
 
 denial. And thus the existence of falsehood; and of ;i denial 
 of falsehood, as well as that of simple negation, is established. 
 It may be asked, why sensation takes the place of dialectic at 
 this stage ? Might not the Sophist, who can shut his eyes at 
 pleasure, profess ignorance, until convinced by rational proof, 
 whether Thesetctus is sitting or flying ? The answer is, first, 
 that it was immaterial to the proof whether the fact appealed 
 to were one of sensible experience or otherwise. Any propo- 
 sition which the mind of the particular hearer instinctively 
 rejected would have served the purpose equally well. A fact 
 of sense is chosen, according to the law of parsimony, as being 
 the simplest. And, secondly, all the dialectical difficulties had 
 been surmounted, and the question of fact alone remained. 
 It had been shewn that non-being existed, and that different 
 kinds might be combined in thought. The only doubt left was 
 whether a combination of non-being with thought and speech 
 was possible. All combinations are equally possible or impos-J 
 sible in the abstract. The existence of any particular combi-j 
 nation is a question of fact. The combination of rest and motion 
 was proved impossible by an appeal to mental experience. That 
 of thought with non-being happens to be proved by an appeal 
 to an opinion based on sense (qbaLverai 8' o Aeyo/xev o-i^xifis 
 aia8ri(X€oos kcu bo£r)s). The example is chosen from <pavTaa[a 
 rather than hiavoia or Sofa. But this is an accident which 
 does not in the slightest degree affect the validity of the 
 argument. 
 
 % The definition of Koyos as the combination of ovofxa and 
 prjfxa, and as a positive or negative determination (cpdcnv re kclI 
 airofyaaiv) , is the earliest clear account of the proposition. It 
 was seen in examining the Thesetetus (Theset. Introd. p. Ixxiv.), 
 and has been evident in the course of this dialogue, with how 
 much difficulty the Greeks formed the conception of the rela- 
 tion of subject and predicate. But in this passage not only is 
 it asserted that every predicate must have a subject (koyov 
 avayKcuov twos elvat Koyov), but the words expressive of sub- 
 ject and predicate (nouns and verbs 8 ) are for the first time 
 accurately distinguished and defined. Now this is in a great 
 measure due to the preceding argument, in which Being is 
 
 s See the instructive excursus of ovojxa and prifxa in the Cratylus, Ueber 
 Benfey on the meaning of the word3 die Aufgabe des Kratylos, p. 1 39. 
 
 m 2 
 
Ixxxiv INTRODUCTION 
 
 declared to be the relation of ideas, and to the subversion of 
 the extreme view of those who held that a <tvjat:\okt) t&v elb&v 
 was impossible. 
 
 3. The psychological definitions in pp. 263 d — 264 b also 
 demand a passing notice. They mark a stage in the develop- 
 ment of Plato's psychology more advanced than that in the 
 Thesetetus (contrast Thcset. 189 e — jyo a with the brief sum- 
 mary bo£a — biavoias cnroTeAevrijiTis), and nearly corresponding to 
 that in the Philebus ; (sec especially Philcb. 33-41). The grada- 
 tions (aXo-6r\(ri<5, cpavTavia, bo£a, biavoia, Ao'yos) are almost in the 
 manner of Aristotle; (cf. Met. 1. 1, and compare Legg. 892 b, 
 Ao'£a — ml cirifxeketa kcu vovs kcu Ttyvr] kcu vop.os ctkXiip&v koX 
 IxaKaKcov kcu fiapiav kcu Kovcpcov irporepa av e'67). Now just as 
 the beginning of a sound logic by the definition of the propo- 
 sition was impossible so long as Being and Non-Being were 
 viewed in their incommunicable abstraction ; so the absolute 
 severance of knowledge from opinion had been an impediment 
 to the growth of an inductive psychology. Both hindrances 
 are removed by the preceding argument : and to this may be 
 referred the increasing clearness in which logical and psycho- 
 logical questions are viewed. 
 
 It remains to say a few words on the general reasoning. 
 The whole energy of the piece is spent on the metaphysical 
 question of the possibility of error, or false appearance. The 
 arguments by which the Sophist is entrapped in the form of 
 non-being are comparatively trifling : and the refutation of 
 particular tenets is obviously left over to another day. The 
 form of non-being itself remains the cardinal point of interest 
 and difficulty. The solution is obtained through a modification 
 of the notions of Being and Negation, which by a process of 
 dialectic are brought out of their first naked abstraction, and 
 are shewn to be logical determinations, both of which are 
 necessarily present in every conception, i. e. in every act of 
 thought. It is found impossible to maintain the sole existence 
 of a Being which is identical with itself, but has no other rela- 
 tions : and true being, as necessarily comprising reason and 
 life, is shewn to partake of the opposite elements of perma- 
 nence and change. 
 
 " Being," at this point, is equivalent to the " sum of all posi- 
 tive notions." But in contemplating the union of being with 
 
TO THE SOPHIST. Ixxxv 
 
 permanence and change, two thoughts arise : first, that nega- 
 tion in the form of difference pervades all things, separating 
 every form from every other ; and, secondly, that this sepa- 
 ration is not necessarily absolute, and docs not exclude the 
 possibility of relations between the forms thus separated. The 
 separation is as essential to thought as the communion, and 
 hence arises a third notion of Being, as the sum of true deter- 
 minations, both positive and negative. This new form (by the 
 "gliscens intellectus" of dialectic) is again distinguished from 
 that which is not Being (which is unreal or false), which how- 
 ever, according to the theory, partakes of Being, if in no other 
 way, as being the object of true negative determination. 
 
 A close perusal of the dialogue will convince the reader that 
 Plato is not here engaged in impugning the axiom of contra- 
 diction. That axiom, though not expressly brought forward, 
 is tacitly assumed throughout. It is taken for granted that an 
 assertion or negation cannot at once be true and not true in the 
 same sense and in the same respect ; (see especially the words 
 in 259 d : Ka(9' eKaarov £\£yyovTa ktiaKokovOeiv, orav re tls erepoy 
 
 OV TTTJ TCLVTOV tlvClL (pjj KCU OTCtV TCLVTOV OV €TtpOV, £k€LVTJ KCU KCLT 
 
 e/cetz/o (pr\cri tovtohv Tte-novdivai norepov). This is not formally 
 drawn out : for Plato is engaged rather with thought than 
 language, and passes by the formal to grapple with the real ; 
 but is nowhere ignored, much less denied. Nor is it quite 
 true that negation is merged in affirmation. But what hap- 
 pens is this. When it is found that Being, though an omni- 
 present notion, is inconceivable without the help of others 
 from which it is distinguished, it becomes evident that not- 
 being is not equivalent to nothingness, but in one sense in- 
 cludes the forms which are distinguished from Being; and 
 generally that the negation of a term is implicitly the predi- 
 cation of all which is not included in that term : — when a 
 thing is not-beautiful, it is to be sought for amongst the mis- 
 cellaneous class of objects of which beauty cannot be predi- 
 cated. All negation therefore is limitation, and in so far deter- 
 mination. The meaning of this is evident and important in 
 connexion with scientific inquiry. Every exclusion and rejec- 
 tion is a step in the direction of discovery. The sum of these 
 exclusions is Non-Being. Thirdly, it is shewn that where iden- 
 tity is denied, participation may still exist. Things different 
 
Ixxxvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 are not necessarily opposite*. The same thing may partake 
 of two things which arc different from it and from each other. 
 This is the communion of kinds. 
 
 Another objection is more plausible, viz. : that Plato is de- 
 ceived by language and has confused together three distinct 
 notions under the name of Being : namely, Existence, Identity, 
 and Participation. We have seen that he passes from the bare 
 notion of Existence to that of determination in thought : and 
 that under this notion of determination he himself carefully 
 distinguishes between participation and identity. How then, 
 it may be asked, does he include these different relations under 
 the same term ov '! For the same reason, it may be answered, 
 for which he assigns ovaCa to non-being, viz. that Being has 
 come to mean reality, or the sum of true determinations. Par- 
 ticipation, as such, is no less real than identity. 
 
 It has been unavoidable, in the preceding sketch, to trans- 
 late Plato's thoughts into language somewhat more subjective 
 than is in perfect keeping with the tenor of ancient philosophy. 
 Or rather the distinction of object and subject, imperfectly 
 known to Plato, has for the sake of clearness been applied 
 throughout. This may perhaps, however, be excused, if his 
 real meaning (ti biavoovixeuos ei7re) has been made at all more 
 intelligible to the English reader. And if his speculations have 
 been rightly interpreted, it may be left to professed meta- 
 physicians to determine their value. 
 
 The criticism of Aristotle on the Platonic doctrine of ISTon- 
 Being (Met. N. 1089), though in parts irrelevant to this dialogue, 
 yet bears to it nearly the same relation which his remarks on 
 the Platonic numbers bear to the Philebus. The cosmological 
 notion of Non-Being as necessary to production, to which he 
 chiefly adverts, may perhaps be traced in the Tmiseus, but is 
 wholly alien to the purpose of the " Sophist." Plato or his 
 followers may have latterly said that the phenomenal Uni- 
 verse would be impossible without an element of falsehood, 
 but no such observation occurs, or could occur in the course 
 of the discussion which we have reviewed. Yet there are 
 
 * For Plato's definition of Opposites, see Phsed. 103 b ; and cf. Repub. 4, 
 436 e. 
 
TO THE SOPHIST. Ixxxvii 
 
 indications that Aristotle, when writing the passage in ques- 
 tion, had this dialogue in his eve. Such are, (i) the language 
 in which the quotation from Parmcnidcs is introduced, espe- 
 cially the words avayKi] elrai to fii] ov bei£ai otl €<ttw. (In the 
 next phrase, however, ovtw — el ttoWcl kariv, the writer's 
 memory seems for once to have wandered to the Farmenides.) 
 (2) The expression Tavrrjv ti]v ^uctic Ae'yei t6 ovk ov. His recol- 
 lection of Plato's writings is partly derived from and partly 
 tinged by the conversations which he has held with younger 
 Academicians. Of the arguments which he adduces only two 
 are applicable to the " Sophist :" — That to proceed by a criti- 
 cism of Parmenides was in effect to revive the philosophy of 
 an earlier age (airop^aai apxa'lK&s) ; and that Being and Not- 
 Being have each several meanings, and these are not distin- 
 guished by Plato. 
 
 It has been already shewn that the negative side of the 
 philosophy of Parmenides was still powerful when Plato wrote, 
 and that he Avas probably right in viewing it as the ttp&tov 
 \jrevbos of the modes of thinking in his own and other schools, 
 which interfered with the real progress of inquiry. The 
 accusation of an " old-fashioned" way of putting the question, 
 only means that Plato did not take for granted the distinc- 
 tions which Aristotle, building on the foundation of his pre- 
 decessor, afterwards introduced. These distinctions are, how- 
 ever, not strictly relevant to the matter in hand. For, as 
 Aristotle himself observes, there are positive and negative 
 determinations under all the categories. And although the 
 affirmation or negation of quality or quantity is not identical 
 with, but only analogous to, that of substance ; yet the word 
 " analogy" does not explain the relative significance of affir- 
 mation and negation generally. With regard to " falsity," 
 which, it may be presumed,, is also to be found under all the 
 categories, and which Aristotle conceives to be the principal 
 meaning of Plato's jut) ov, it has been shewn above that the term 
 is so extremely abstract as almost to supersede the distinction 
 between falsity and denial. That which is falsely predicated 
 is truly denied, and vice versa. Falsehood, in Plato's sense, 
 arises when Not-Being is predicable of speech or thought, 
 and this happens when Not-Being is affirmed or Being denied. 
 
 The other species of Not-Being to which Aristotle alludes is 
 
Ixxxviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 his own principle of potentiality, which w in one sense bat is 
 not in another^ is potentially, but not actually, existent: the 
 same which he also compares with the uirapov of the Philebus, 
 and the aireipos bv&s of the Platonists. This, he says, is the 
 real "other" which along with the form enables us to account 
 for production. But, as we have said, Plato is not here en- 
 gaged in accounting for production; and, to use Aristotle's 
 own language, this hvvap.zi. 6v is /uwj 6v only /caret avpfteftrjKos. 
 And the converse is equally true. In saying (e a cloud is not 
 a shower," we are only incidentally interested in the question 
 whether a cloud can be converted into a shower. Whether 
 this be so or not, the meaning of the negative proposition 
 remains the same. That the notions "cloud" and "shower," 
 although separated by the negative particle, may still bear 
 to each other a relation such as that of the potential to the 
 actual, is a truth which could not easily have won acceptance 
 before the " Sophist" was written. 
 
 This question, like that of the unity of Good, brings into 
 strong relief the different genius of the two philosophers, 
 universality being Plato's watchword, and distinctness that of 
 Aristotle. 
 
 It may be worth while to see how Aristotle himself answers 
 Parmenides in the opening of the lectures on Physics. (Physic. 
 Auscult. I. 3.) " Parmenides did not see that Being has 
 several meanings, and that each kind of being, although one 
 in meaning, yet in point of continuity is many. For there is 
 a difference, which philosophers in those days had not per- 
 ceived, between whiteness and that to which whiteness attaches. 
 Substance and attribute exist in a different sense (to ehat erepov). 
 But those who assert the unity of Being, must hold that what- 
 ever is said to exist, exists as substance. Otherwise that which 
 happens to exist (which partakes of existence) is other than 
 Being. And hence there will exist something which has no 
 existence. For nothing has existence (ex hypothesi) but the 
 form of Being. No particular thing can have existence, unless 
 Being is allowed to signify a plurality of things in the sense 
 which makes this possible. For if essential Being cannot be 
 an attribute, Being may signify that which is not as well as 
 that which is. For to speak of a white thing as white is truth, 
 i. e. Being : but whiteness is a distinct notion from essence ; 
 
TO THE SOPHIST. Ixxxix 
 
 and therefore, ex hypothesi, is not, in the most absolute sense. 
 Therefore Being is not ; which is absurd, therefore Being must 
 signify a plurality. 
 
 " Again, if essential Being is one, it can have no extension ; 
 for there will then be a difference of parts. But the parts 
 even of a logical whole exist as essentially as the whole ; for 
 they are not mere accidents, even of the kind which implies 
 the definition of the subject : (as, for instance, the accident of 
 snubness implies a nose). The elements of concrete existence 
 (matter, form, to e£ aixfyoiv) have each an indivisible existence : 
 and the notion of each is different. The Atomists perceived 
 something of this, when they attempted, while admitting that 
 if being has one meaning, all must be one, to introduce diver- 
 sity by the assertion of the existence of Not-Being, and by 
 breaking up the continuity of Being into particles. But even 
 if it be granted that Being has one meaning, and the con- 
 tradictory of being cannot exist, there may still be Not-Being ; 
 for this may mean not absolute non-entity, but the negation 
 of some particular Being . On the whole, it is most unreason- 
 able to say that all things will be one unless there is some- 
 thing besides Being. For who understands what is meant by 
 Being, unless particular substances are meant ? But if this be 
 so, nothing prevents a plurality of Beings in the sense indi- 
 cated above." 
 
 This dialogue, although not generally thought the most 
 attractive of Plato's writings, has at least twice received signal 
 attention from great philosophers. By the JNeo-Platonists, 
 Plotinus and Proclus, the words of the " Eleatic Stranger" 
 are quoted no less frequently than those of Socrates : and the 
 five categories, Being, Motion, Rest, Sameness, Difference, 
 are deliberately preferred by them to the ten of Aristotle. 
 (Plotin. Ennead. 5, 1-3 ; 6, 1-3.) More recently, Hegel 
 found in the Sophist not only the highest point reached by 
 Plato, but an anticipation of his own dialectic ; and he enhances 
 the resemblance by a curious mistranslation of the passage 
 259 d : ro TavTa idaavTa — veoyevtjs <x>v. " Das Schwere unci 
 Wahrhafte ist dieses, zu zeigen, dasz das, was das Andere ist, 
 Dasselbe ist, und, was Dasselbe ist, ein Anderes ist : und zwar 
 in derselben Riicksicht, und nach derselben Seite, dasz das 
 Eine ihnen geschehen ist, wird auch die andere Bestimmung an 
 
xc INTllODUCTlOxN TO THE SOPHIST. 
 
 ihncn aufgezeigt. Dagcgcn zu zeigen, das Dasselbe auf irgcnd 
 cine AVeiso cin Andercs, und das Andcrc auch Dassclbe, dasz 
 das Grosze auch kloin JJ (z. B. Protagoras 1 Wurfel), " und das 
 Aenliche auch un'ahnlich scy, und scin Gefallen daran haben, 
 so durch Griinde immer das Entgcgcngcsetzte vorzubringen, 
 — dicsz ist keine wahrhafte Einsiclit (eAey^os), und offenbar das 
 Erzcugniss eines Neulings," ira Denken, " welcher erst das 
 Wcsen zu beriihrcn anfangt;" (Werke, vol. 14. p. 210. ed. 
 1840.) 
 
 Both the ancient and the modern appreciation were in- 
 fluenced by preconceptions ; and supposed a dogmatic and sys- 
 tematic intention which is not to be found in Plato. Whether 
 the movement of modern philosophy, from Spinoza through 
 Kant to Hegel, is in any respects analogous to that which has 
 now been traced from Parmenides through the Plato of the 
 Phaedrus to the Plato of the Sophist, is a question which it 
 belongs to the historian of philosophy to decide. 
 
 
2 0*1 2TH2 
 
20$I2TH2. 
 
 T.I. 
 
 jd.Steph. 
 
 b. 2 1 6. 
 
 ta tot AiAAoroT npomnA 
 
 6EOAOP05;, 2QKPATH2,£EN02 EAEATH2, 
 0EAITHTO2. 
 
 J\ATA ttjv y6e$ ofioXoylap, co ^coKpares, rjKOfiev 
 
 i. The word a-o^ia-r^s, like 
 many others in Plato (e. g. 
 
 Aoyos, 8idvoia, yevecris, crTOi^eioi/, 
 
 o-co/xa), may be observed in 
 the act of passing from the 
 common or vernacular, to- 
 wards a technical and philo- 
 sophical use. When Aristo- 
 tle defines the Sophist xPW a - 
 
 tktttjs ano <paivop.evrjs (rotfiias aXK 
 
 owe ovcrrjs, he gives the name 
 a meaning which had no exist- 
 ence before Socrates, and which 
 became fixed only through the 
 present dialogue. In Men. 85 b 
 Socrates, addressing the slave, 
 employs the word inthe mostpo- 
 
 pular sense : Kakovai 8e ye ravrrjv 
 diafxerpov oi ao<pi(TTal. Here the 
 geometers are called trocpia-Tai, 
 as the poets were by Pindar, be- 
 cause practising a clever thing 
 
 (cro<pi£6p.evoi ti (ToCpurp-a) beyond 
 
 the reach of ordinary men. That 
 the name thus used acquired an 
 association of ignorant dislike, 
 mingled either with contempt 
 or fear, appears from two places 
 
 in the Prometheus of Aeschylus, 
 where the wise Titan is so 
 called by the servile ministers 
 
 of Zeus (1. 62 : KP. tva p.a6r] 
 
 ao(piarTT]s (contriver) &v Aibs va>- 
 6e<TTepos. 1. 946 : 'EP. ae tou ao- 
 (pta-Tijv (thou who meddlest with 
 deep matters) top Tnnpais vnepm- 
 Kpov). It was with something of 
 a similar feeling that the con- 
 servative Athenian citizen spoke 
 of the public teachers of the 
 Socratic age. See the words of 
 Anytus in the Meno, 91c, where 
 this hatred finds an extreme 
 expression. The sentiment 
 with which they were regarded 
 must have had various phases, 
 from this utter abhorrence to 
 the eager interest and curiosity 
 of Hippocrates (Prot.310), who 
 however (lb. 312 a) would not 
 for the world be himself taken 
 for a Sophist. There was added 
 to the jealousy, fear of an 
 influence not understood (lb. 
 316 c), the sort of caste-anti- 
 pathy with which the Athenian 
 
 Prelude. 
 True to the 
 appoint- 
 ment of the 
 previous 
 day(Theset. 
 
HAATQNOS 
 
 sui.. fin.) avTOt. re Kocr/jLtcos kou rovSe 
 Tlieodorua 
 
 i'"; 1 Tilr "; gentleman looked on those who 
 tetus meet 2 „ , ,,. 
 Socrates in followed any trade. ( I. also 
 the same Lach. 197 tl : irpeirei 
 
 . . . cro(f>i<TTi] paWov to. rotavra 
 K<lfJL\l/€Vflfdat fj dv8[H k. t. X. 
 
 The " Sophists" in Plato's time 
 were already commonly viewed 
 as a separate class. Cf. Tim. 
 19 e, Rep. 6, 492 a. Plato — 
 who, as we learn from Plutarch 
 in his life of Dion, was himself 
 called Sophist by the courtiers 
 of Syracuse (cf. Polit. 299 c, 
 where the true philosopher is 
 called by the vulgar adoXeo-x 7 !" 
 Tivh aocpKTTTjv, and inf. 216 e : 
 Tore 8e o-ofao-rai) — endeavours in 
 this and the following dialogue 
 to limit the application of the 
 term, with the odium belong- 
 ing to it, to that false or pre- 
 tended wisdom which he desires 
 to distinguish from the true — 
 to the professors of knowledge 
 who " had their reward" a- 
 mongst his contemporaries. 
 And the termination, -l<ttt)s, 
 which might imply affectation 
 or pretension, was conducive 
 to this purpose. In a similar 
 spirit the meaning of the 
 word SiaXeKTiKos was modified 
 by Aristotle. The necessity of 
 defining the Sophist is asserted 
 by Socrates in Protag. 313 c. 
 
 P. 1, 3. 2QKPATH2] Here, as 
 in the Parmenides and Timaeus, 
 Socrates introduces but does 
 not conduct the conversation 
 (Tim. 17 b: TI. ovBi yap av 
 f'irj 8iKawv, x#«s vtto (tov £evi- 
 crdevras ols f)v npenov t-eviois, 
 fir) ov Trpodvficos (ri tovs Xoiirovs 
 rjpav avrecpecrrtau. lb. 26 e: 2J2. 
 Xpr/ \eyew fxev v/xas, ifie 8e avri tcov 
 X@£S \6y(i3V Tjcrvxiav ayeiv). But 
 
 although the person of Socrates 
 
 Ttva ^tvov dyo/iev, TO fxtv \>. urn 
 
 is in the background, the So- 
 cratic spirit of inquiry still 
 reigns in this ami the follow- 
 ing dialogue. There arc at 
 leasl four points in which this 
 intellectual (as distinguished 
 from the personal) influence of 
 Socrates may still be traced. 
 1. The use of trivial and gro- 
 tesque examples to illustrate 
 general truths (see Xen. Memo- 
 rabilia I. 2. § 23, and compare 
 the words of Callicles in the 
 Gorgias, 491 a : del enevrias re 
 Kat Kvafaas Ka\ payelpovs Aeytof 
 kol larpovs ovbev Travel), and the 
 
 elevation of this practice into 
 a principle of scientific method. 
 The angler has a definition no 
 less than the highest artist. 
 Philosophical classification re- 
 spects not persons, but views 
 the military commander and 
 the destroyer of vermin as 
 ecmally deserving a place in 
 the category of huntsmen. The 
 Sophist is a salesman, a magi- 
 cian, a sportsman, a scene- 
 painter. The image of the 
 " herdsman" (compare Xen. 
 Mem. 1. a), used satirically in 
 the Thesetetus (p. 174 d) and 
 in Rep. 1, and with a more 
 serious meaning in the Laws 
 (4, 713 b, c), appears again in 
 the Politicus, at first in the hu- 
 morous but afterwards in the 
 deeper signification. In the 
 same dialogue an elaborate pa- 
 rallel is drawn between the 
 statesman and the weaver, and 
 this leads to a vindication of 
 the argument from Example. 
 Here also the Socratic mode 
 of teaching by instances (coin- 
 ciding with the Pythagorean 
 parable) is not only imitated 
 
20<I>I2TH2. 
 
 216. yeuos e£ 'EAear, eraipov 8e tu>v u/x(fA Ylapuzvi&riv 
 
 but is made the object of re- 
 flection and study. 2. The con- 
 viction, which appears chiefly 
 in the Politicus, that all prac- 
 tical wisdom may be resolved 
 into pure knowledge, aud that 
 this master-science is one only, 
 and stands in close relation to 
 all others. 3. The destructive, 
 cross-questioning method of 
 Socrates is characterised as a 
 purgation of the soul (i<a8app.6s, 
 a Pythagorean word) from the 
 vapours and obstructions of 
 conceit. It is this true puri- 
 fication of the mind, the in- 
 alienable privilege of the phi- 
 losopher, of which the mere 
 controversial art of the So- 
 phist is a false mimicry. 
 In this, however, there is also a 
 reference to the negative dialec- 
 tic of Zeno. 4. The irony of this 
 dialogue (and still more of the 
 Politicus) while truly Platonic 
 accords Avell with the charac- 
 ter of the Platonic Socrates. 
 The position assigned to the 
 Sophist, not in the first, nor 
 in the second, nor in the third 
 portion of imitative art ; and 
 the discovery of the politicians 
 of Greece far down amongst the 
 class of servants, are instances 
 of this : also the ludicrous de- 
 scription of a state in which 
 navigation and medicine should 
 be regulated by law, of which 
 there is perhaps a germ in 
 the question of Socrates, Would 
 they choose a pilot, or a car- 
 penter, or a flute-player by 
 lot 1 ? In these and other pas- 
 sages there is revived, with 
 an increase of bitterness which 
 is Plato's own, the " pro- 
 voking irony and strange in- 
 
 sight into the world," which is 
 one of the most marked fea- 
 tures of the Platonic, as it was 
 probably of the real, Socrates. 
 
 P. 1 , 4. Kara ttjv x@* s 6po\oyiav\ 
 Theret. 210 c. Socrates is 
 already at the place of meet- 
 ing : according to the These- 
 tetus a palaestra, possibly the 
 Lyceum, or the school of Tau- 
 reas. There is, however, no 
 reference to the scene of the 
 conversation, either in this dia- 
 logue or the next. 
 
 {jicopev avroL re Kai aynpev'j 
 Rep. 4, 427 d : (TKOirei — qvtos re 
 teal top d8e\(f)6v irapaKaXei. Cf. 
 
 also Xen.Anab.III. i, §44. The 
 expression is modified by a re- 
 turn to the indicative mood, 
 as the sentence grows under 
 the author's hand. 
 
 P. 2, 1 . Koafiims] " Like well- 
 behaved people." " As in duty 
 bound." 
 
 t. eralpov "feratpowf] Se- 
 veral MSS. have erepov in the 
 first place. (Ficinus, longe vero 
 alterum ac dissimilem a Par- 
 menide et Zenone suis requa- 
 libus.) But the Stranger 
 afterwards identifies himself 
 with the followers of Parme- 
 nides, though he is not a ser- 
 vile follower, and Socrates in 
 this place alludes to the e'Xey- 
 xos of Zeno. The corrup- 
 tion may be due to some one 
 who thought the criticism of 
 Parmenides in the sequel incon- 
 sistent with the words as they 
 stood. The passage is thrice 
 quoted by Proclus; Comment, 
 in Parmen. p. 42 : 'AXXa km 6 
 
 'Y.Xedrrjs aexfios Kai twv irepl tov 
 YIappevi8r]v kol Zrjvoova eraipav ai- 
 tos &>u. lb. p. 7 2 - naiyap entlvov 
 
 ]i;,i;':;l 1:1. 
 
 and bring 
 with t!i(.'in 
 an Eleatic 
 friend, 
 
 whom 
 
 B 2, 
 
nAATQNOS 
 
 Theodoras 
 introduces 
 us a true 
 philoso- 
 pher. 
 
 Socrates is 
 awe-struck. 
 " What if 
 h« I"' some 
 God in dis- 
 guise, who, 
 as pouts 
 
 KCU Z)/va>i>a •\'€Taipaii>'\', fxrxAa St uvdpa (f)iAo- p. 2lfl 
 au(j)oi'. 
 
 20. ' Ap ovv, eo Qeodtope, ov ^evov uAAa tlvol 
 6ebv ayoiv Kara rov 'Q/jujpou Aoyov AeAr)$a? ; oy 
 5 (f»](Tii> aAAouy re Oeov? roh uudpcQirois, onocroL /xere- b 
 
 ovroi npoaeiprjKfv, eratpov tuiv 
 ap(jn II. kci\ Z. pdXa 8e uvdpa 
 (pi\6cro(pov . II). p. 83 : iraipos 
 Tovnov vrriipxuv, \iraipa>v\ is pro- 
 bably a gloss 011 rav. (Bodl. tov.) 
 The word is transposed in one 
 MS. (A), which gives iralpav kui 
 tfvava. It is doubtful whether 
 t&v is a partitive genitive or 
 governed by iraipov : — "A com- 
 panion of the number of those" 
 or " a companion of those." 
 The former is more idiomatic, 
 gives a better emphasis to irai- 
 pov, and is on the whole more 
 consistent with the quotations 
 of Proclus. 
 
 For the use of the word 
 iraipos, cf. Theset. 180 c : ov 
 yap o~oi eraipoi elaiv. " This 
 
 stranger is of Eleatic race, an 
 adherent of the school of Par- 
 menides and Zeno, and he is 
 a true philosopher." 
 
 Avtlvo , ov p.ev koX e'jz 
 
 I . p.dXa St avbpa (JjiX6(Torj>ov] 
 ( T. Pann. 1 26 b : oldt — n-oXt- 
 
 ral poi flat, pdXa (jjiKutroj.oi. For 
 the conjunction of the adverb 
 and noun, cf. Legg. 1, 639 b : 
 aXXd tivoov o-(j)68pa yvvaiiccbv. 
 
 3. ov £tvov dXXd nva #eoi>] 
 The ausvver of Theodorus, 
 oi>x ovtos 6 rp. r. £., shews 
 that these words of Socrates 
 express an ironical fear lest 
 the stranger should bring the 
 Zenonian negative dialectic to 
 bear on his own (i. e. Plato's) 
 mode of reasoning. Compare 
 Euthyd. 273 e : el 8e vvv dXrj- 
 dcos ravTrjv ri]V e7VL0-Tt]p.rjv e'xe- 
 tov, lXea> e'lrjTov. dre^i/cos yap 
 eycoye a(f)a> u>o-nep 8eco irpoo-ayo- 
 pevo). 
 
 4. XeX^oy] Sc. aavrov. Cf. 
 
 Theaet. 180 e. 
 
 5. aXXovs re 6eovs~\ OdvSS. P. 
 483-7: 
 
 aXes 8v(Trr}vov dXijrrjv, 
 
 ovkofitv, el fir) ttoxj rts iirovpavioi deos eo-rtv. 
 kcil re 6eo\ tjeivoiaiv e'oiKores dXXo8a7rolai.v, 
 navroloL reXtBovres, e-n-io-Tpaxpoio-i noXrjas, 
 dvdpwTTCov vftptv re Ka\ eiivop.irju e'cfropcovres. 
 
 lb. I. 270, I : 
 
 Zevs 5' eTTtTiprjTaip iKtrdaiv re £eiva>v re, 
 ^eii/tos, 09 tjeivoio-iv a\C aiSoioio-ie oirrjSei. 
 Both these passages are present Greek religion. Bodl. dXXrjXovs : 
 
 to the speaker's mind, but the 
 second less distinctly than the 
 first : for geivoio-iv is dropped, 
 and aldoioicriv taken actively, = 
 respectful or merciful. The 
 substitution of 6e6s for Zeus-, 
 the general for the individual, 
 belongs to the later phase of 
 
 but the correction is not by the 
 first hand. 
 
 Cf. Legg. 5, 730 a: 6 §ivtos 
 
 imarav §aip.u)v Kal 6eos ra> £evia> 
 o-vvenop-evoi Au. lb. 12, 953 e: 
 TificovTfs i^iviov Ala. 
 
 (iXXovs n Beovs tu'is di>0pa>nois] 
 The apodosis of these words is 
 
20<I>I2TH2. 
 
 3. 216. 'xpvcriv alSovs St-tcaia?, kou 8r/ koll top i^eviov ov)( 
 rJKKTTa 6eov avvo7rabov yiyvoptvov v(3pei? re kul 
 tvvo[±ias tcov dvOpcoircov KaOopav. rcl^ ovu dv koll 
 
 aOl TIS OVTO? TCOV KptLTTOVCOV GwllTOLTO^ (pavXoVS 
 
 7][j.as ovtols eV Tois XoyoLs iiroip'op.ei'os re koll e\e'ytjtoi>, 
 Oebs cov T19 f:\ey ktikos. 
 
 GEO. Ov\ OVT09 6 Tpoiros, co *2coKpaTc-s, rov tje'vov, 
 
 dAXa fxerpicoTepo? tcov 7repl ray eptdas 1 ecnrovSaKorcou. 
 
 koll jjlol Sok€l Oeos pc-v 6\vrjp ovhapcos eivod, Ohos fXTjV 
 
 c ttclvtcls yap eyco tovs (pi\ocr6(pov? toiovtovs irpocra- 
 
 yopevco. 
 
 absorbed in avvonadov yiyvd- 
 fiepop. 
 
 I. Snocroi — StKaias] Said in 
 compliment to Theodoras, who, 
 in reward for his modest and 
 candid temper (see the Thesete- 
 tus), may unawares be enter- 
 taining a superior being. Com- 
 pare the combination of aldcos 
 with 81KJ7 in the Protagoras 
 (322 c), and in Hesiod. 
 
 4. tu>v KpeiTTovcou] " Some 
 higher power," i. e. a God or 
 Hero, cf. Legg. 4,718 a : napa 
 
 6ea>v Kai ocroi Kpeirroves rjpcov. 
 Euthyd. 291 a : prj ns tcov 
 KpeiTTOPOov napcov avra icpdey^aro ' 
 Ep. y, 326 e : tones pr)v nvt. t5>v 
 xpeiTTOvcov apxyv (3a\e(r6ai twv vxiv 
 yeyovoTcov irpaypaTcov. Compare 
 
 Aesch. Prom. 905 : pr/8e Kpeia- 
 
 aovcov [decov] epcos acpvKTOV oppa 
 7rpoa8pa.Koi pe. 
 
 5. e7To\j/6pevos] Referring to 
 ecpopcovres in the line of Homer. 
 
 7. Ov% OVTOS 6 rpoiros — TOV 
 
 ^»ou] Cf. Theast. 145 e : ovx 
 ovtos 6 Tponos Beobcopov. 
 
 8. perpiarepos] " More rea- 
 sonable." Cf. Thea?t. 161 b : 
 dnoSf'i-acrOai perpias. 
 
 tcov nepl rds epibas io-irovha- 
 kotojv] Cf. Isocrates Soph. 20 : 
 
 tcov TTtpl Tas ?pi8as KaKivbovpivcov. 
 And for eo-novdciKOTcov inf. p. 259 
 b, C : etre — X at P ei — TOVS ^dyovs 
 s\kcov, ovk aj-ia 7To\\r)s o-rrovdrjs 
 
 icnrovDaKe. The Stranger is re- 
 presented as not contentious, 
 that the reader may be pre- 
 pared for the modification of 
 the Eleatic doctrine in what 
 follows, and for the general 
 scope of the dialogue, which 
 tends to deprecate the arts 
 of controversy. 
 
 9. dvrjp] In this and similar 
 places the MSS. persistently 
 give dvrjp. This is equally the 
 case in tragedy (e. g. Soph. Aj. 
 9 : tvhov yap dvrjp), where the 
 quantity proves the presence 
 of the article. 
 
 6eios] Cf. Rep. 1, 331 e : 
 
 aocpbs yap nal deios dvrjp (6 2t- 
 pcovidr/s) . Phileb. 1 8 b : ehe tis 
 6eos eire kcu delos cwdpconos. In 
 Legg. i, 626 c, the address d> 
 dele occurs — characteristically 
 — in the mouth of the Spartan. 
 
 10. toiovtovs] Sc. Be'iovs. Cf. 
 
 Theeet. 154 e, Phsed. 67 a. 
 
 have ■• ung, 
 
 mpa- 
 
 niea the 
 good man's 
 going, and 
 comes to 
 exjio.se the 
 notbing- 
 5 oess of 
 Athenian 
 wisdom ?" 
 
 Tmeo. "He 
 is not con- 
 tentious, 
 as some 
 are: and 
 certainly 
 10 no God, 
 though I 
 must call 
 him, as I 
 do all phi- 
 losophers, 
 divine." 
 
nAAmNos 
 
 SoOB."And 
 the divine 
 philoso- 
 pher is also 
 rarely dis- 
 cerned, and 
 often walks 
 disguised 
 through 
 the igno- 
 rance of 
 other men, 
 whose life 
 he watches 
 from above, 
 appearing 
 to them 
 
 ^Q.. K«Ao3y ye, co r/j/'Ae. touto \uvtol kivSvvc-vu p. liQ 
 to yevo? ov iroXv ri paav, oV eros c-l7tc-li>, eivou dia- 
 Kpivetv ?/ to too Oeov' irdvv yap avSpes ovtol 
 iravToloi (j)avTa^ofiepoi Sia rrjv tcov aXXcov ayvoiav 
 ilivLo~Tpco(\mcTi noAija?, oi fxrj 7rXacrTLO? dXX % ovtco? 
 (friXocrocpoi, KaOopwvTts v\\ro9c-v tov tcov koltco fiiov, 
 Keel Tols fxev Sokovctlv elvat tov /j.rj8c-vo? Tipuoi, rols* 
 
 I. roOro pevrot to yevos~\ The 
 
 more remote purpose of the dia- 
 logue appears in these words. 
 The definition of the Sophist 
 is preparatory to that of the 
 philosopher. 
 
 3. to tov 6eov\ Note the sin- 
 gular case with the article, ex- 
 pi'essing a generalized concep- 
 tion — as in tov avdpunrov : Thu- 
 cyd. 1, 140. 
 
 tow] "certainly;" almost 
 = aTexvas, referring to the words 
 of Homer. Compare the use 
 of Tvavv ye, ndvu p.ev ovv in re- 
 plies. 
 
 4. iravToloi (pavTa^opevoi] (pav- 
 tci(. is Substituted for TeXeOovTes 
 
 because the philosophers do not 
 really change, but appear in 
 various disguises through the 
 ignorance of men. Compare 
 Rep. 2, 381-2, where there 
 is a reference to the same pas- 
 sage of Homer. See also 
 Timseus 41 a, where the tradi- 
 tionary deities are spoken of in 
 contradistinction to the hea- 
 venly bodies as 00-01 cpaivovrai 
 Ka0 y oaop av edeXtoai Qeo'i. 
 
 5. oi fir] 7r\ao-Tios clXX' ovtcos 
 <£iAdVoo5oi] " The real, not the 
 would-be philosophers." Cf. 
 Thea?t. 173 c: Ae'ycopev — irep\ 
 tcov Kopv<palcov, tL yap liv tis tovs 
 ye (pavXcos 8iaTpij3ovTas ev cpiXo- 
 
 o-o<pia Xe'yot. And see the de- 
 
 scription of the " little bald 
 blacksmith" in Rep. 6, 495 e. 
 For ttXckttSk;, cf. Legg. i, 642 d : 
 d\r]do>s kciI ov tl 7rXacrra)« elo~\v 
 ayaOol. lb. 6, 777 d. 
 
 6. KcidopowTts] Echoing nado- 
 pav supr., but with the addi- 
 tional meaning of " down- 
 wards." For Kad. vy\fi'i6ev tov 
 twv Kara jBlov, see the digression 
 in the Theaetetus 173 b, 175 
 c, d. Also Rep. B. 7. 
 
 7. rot? pev boKovaiv — paviK&>s\ 
 " The true philosopher appears 
 to some men nothing worth : 
 to others, worth all the world : 
 now he presents the semblance 
 of a statesman, now of a public 
 teacher : and, again, he may 
 give to some men the impres- 
 sion that he is clean mad." 
 The philosophic spirit is a 
 treasure whose value is un- 
 known : a pearl of great 
 price, for which he who has 
 found it will sell all that 
 he has : appearing now in the 
 practical, now in the specula- 
 tive sphere : in both apt to be 
 confounded with lower types 
 of wisdom by ordinary men, 
 who, when they begin to see 
 the real issues towards which 
 the spirit leads, will brand it 
 with the name of foolishness 
 or madness. For tov iravros, cf. 
 Phsedr. 235 e. The article is 
 
SOM2TH2. 
 
 <5' aijioi tov iravros' kgu tot€ p.ev ttoXltikoi (f)avTa- 
 (ovtoli, tote 8e crcxpiaTai, Tore 8' ecrTtv oh 86£av 
 TrapaaxpiVT av cos iravTairacriv t^ovTts paviKco?. 
 tov yiivTOi ^evov i]plv r]8ea>? av irvvOavolp^v, el 
 (j)iXov avrcp, tl ravff oi nrep\ tov e'/cet tottov rjyouvTO 5 
 Kal ojvo/JLa^ov. 
 
 GEO. Ta irola 8rj ; 
 
 212. ^oc^LO-TrjV, 7ToXltik6v, (fiiAoaocpov. 
 
 GEO. TV 8e fxaXiara kou to ttolov tl ire pi amwv 
 8iaiTopi]6eh epeaOai SievoyOrjs ; k 
 
 here partly suggested by tov 
 firjdevos, which hardly needs 
 illustration. 
 
 1. tots pev — Tore Se] Bodl. 
 p. m. Tore fiev — tote Se. 
 
 ttoXitikol] E. g. Epiinenides, 
 Solon, Pythagoras. 
 
 2. cro^ia-Tai] As Socrates in 
 the 'Clouds,'or Plato at Syracuse. 
 The word is used here with- 
 out any invidious association, 
 like ttoXitikol, merely denoting a 
 recognized class. The variation 
 of language in rifuoi — agtoi is 
 in keeping with the studied 
 refinement of this dialogue. 
 
 3. TravTCLTTacnv e\ovres [wviicas] 
 Cf. Phsedr. 249 c, d : lb. e : al- 
 
 Tiav e'xei a>s pavLKms bLaKeipevos : 
 
 and the words of Alcibiades 
 in the Symposium 218 b : 
 
 navres yap KeKoivoivrjKaTe rrjs (pi- 
 Xoaofpov pavlas re ko.1 ^aK^fias. 
 
 Note the emphatic position of 
 
 fiaviKws. 
 
 4. tov pevroi £evov~\ The double 
 fitvTot marks a double transi- 
 tion : from the person of the 
 Stranger to the nature of philo- 
 sophers, and from this to the 
 Stranger again,who is addressed 
 with an inquiry bearing on the 
 
 subject which has been thus sug- 
 gested. " The philosopher is apt 
 tobe confounded with the States- 
 man and Sophist, except when 
 he is looked upon as mad. Will 
 the Stranger clear the confusion 
 by defining each of the terms 
 in question ?" 
 
 tj/jllv gives a courteous turn 
 to *fche expression, like poi 
 after a vocative. 
 
 et (piXov avra] Cf. Theset. 
 162b: dXX' el ovrcos, a> Qe68cope, 
 <ro\ (piXov, ovS" ep-ol ex_6pov. infr. 
 222 b. 
 
 5. tl ravd* — a>v6pa£ov~] "What 
 
 his countrymen (in Magna 
 Grascia) thought of these mat- 
 ters, and how they used to 
 apply the terms." The imper- 
 fect implies the qualification 
 "When he was amongst them." 
 For the adverbial ti, cf. Phsedr. 
 
 234 C : tl vol (paiverai 6 \6yos " 
 9. Ti 8e pa\io~ra — Sieporjdrjs] 
 The curious formality of this 
 address belongs to Plato's later 
 style. (See General Introd.) Cf. 
 
 infr. 226 b : to tto'lov avTav nepL 
 ISov^Tjdels Sf/Xcocrcu, irapa.8eiypa.Ta 
 ■rrpodus TavTa Kara ttcivtcov ijpov ) 
 
 24O C : TTfj KOA TO 7TOtoV TL (fiofiov- 
 
 niiw rv^ 
 
 Statesman, 
 now aa 
 • Sophist,' 
 despised, 
 believed in, 
 wondered 
 at as mad. 
 
 Sophist, 
 
 Statesman, 
 Philoso- 
 pher : — 
 What lias 
 our Italian 
 friend to 
 tell us of 
 these 
 things ? 
 
8 
 
 IIAATQN02 
 
 l>o his 
 conntry- 
 men ac- 
 count them 
 one, or two, 
 or three '" 
 
 Tlie Stran- 
 ger had 
 been al- 
 ready asked 
 this ques- 
 tion on the 
 way. 
 He will 
 shew that 
 each of the 
 three terms 
 denotes a 
 different 
 nature, 
 though to 
 distinguish 
 them is by 
 no means 
 a simple 
 task. 
 
 213. T68e' TTOTtpQV €V iraVTOL TOLVTO. ev6pi(j)V l) \>-2\J. 
 
 860, i] KaOairep tu ouofiara rpla, rpla kou yevrj 8ua- 
 povpevoi Kaff ev ovopta yevos eKaarco irpoo-rjTrTOV ; 
 
 GEO. 'AAA' ov8el?, cos eyco/xai, ([jOovo? avrco 8teX- 
 5 0eiv aura. ' H 7TC09, co £eVe, Xeycopiev; 
 
 SE. Our cos", co Qe68cope. (pOovos p.ev yap ov8el?, b 
 ov8e )(aXe7rov elwelv on ye rp'C rjyovvTO' Kaff eKacrrov 
 pcr/v SLopLcraaOai cra(J)co?, t'l ttot ecmv, ov ap.iK.pov ov8e 
 pa8iov epyov. 
 'o 0EO. Kal p.ev 8rj Kara rvyj]v ye, co ^coKpares, 
 Xoycov e7reXa(3ov 7rapairXr](Ticov cov Kal irp\v rjpa? 
 8evp eXOelv 8iepcoTcovre? avrov eTvyya.vop.ev. 6 8e 
 ramd, airep 7rpo? ere vvv, koll tote iaKrj7rr€TO irpos 
 rj peas' eire\ 8iaKr)Koevat, ye <§>r\cnv 'iKavcos Kal ovk 
 isapLvqpovelv. 
 
 20. Mt) tolvvv, co tjeve, rjfxcov tt)v ye 7rpcorr)v c 
 
 pevos ovra> XeyeLS ) Legg. 6,752b: 
 
 Ttepi TL (SXiTTCdV Kai 7Toi paXlCTTa 
 avrb e'lpr/Kas ra vvv; lb. 4, 705 cl : 
 els 8r] tl TG>v elpr/pevcov jSke\jras, 
 
 emes o Xe'yeis ; "In regard to 
 what point, and with a view to 
 what difficulty respecting these 
 things, did the question occur 
 to you?" 
 
 2. rpLa Kaiyevrj] The Bodleian 
 MS., as well as Alii, has Ka\ yevrj, 
 which is manifestly right, to 
 yevrj does not suit with Siaipov- 
 
 pevoi. They do not divide the 
 classes, but distinguish three. 
 " Did they, as the names are 
 three, distinguish also three 
 kinds, and assign one severally 
 to each name 1 ?" 
 
 6. (pdovos — elnelp] (fidovos IS 
 
 not to be joined with ehreiv. 
 " You are right, Theodorus ; I 
 have no wish to withhold any- 
 
 thing." 
 
 7. rpi' r)yovvTO~\ So Bodl. 
 
 1 1 . \6yoav — hv $iepa>TU>vTes~] For 
 
 the apposition of the clause to 
 the relative, cf. Theaet. 158 b : 
 to Toiovfte dp(pio-l3fjTJ]pa, — 6 ttoX- 
 Aa/as <re oipai aKr/Koevai epwTvv- 
 
 tcov. Compare Tim. 20 d : koL 
 en irpoTepov Kad' 6B6v av Tavra 
 eo~K(movp.ev. . 
 
 TrapaTrXrjo-Lcvv a>v\ As Trapa- 
 
 nXrjo-ms is rarely found with the 
 genitive, there is probably here 
 a double attraction : i. e. hv = 
 
 ols = TOVTOtS ovs. 
 
 12. 6 8e TavTa] Heindorf's 
 slight emendation (ravTa for 
 TavTa) seems to be required by 
 the antithesis npos ere vvv — totc 
 
 npos rjpas. 
 
 16. Mr) — yevrj] " Be not so 
 cruel as to refuse our first boon 
 when we have asked it of you." 
 
20<M2TH2. 9 
 
 p. 217. airrjcrdpTcoi/ yaptv airapvrj9ei<i yivr\. ToaovSe <5' -qp.lv 
 (/)pa(e' irorepov elooOas i]8lov avTOS 67n (tolvtov 
 paKpaj Xoycp diefJLevcu Xe'ycov touto, b av ev8el^aa- 
 6ai tco fiovXrjOrj?, rj 81 epcorrjcrecov, oiov wore kcll 
 llappevl8r) xpcojjL€i>w koll 8le^iovtl Xoyovs irayKaXovs 5 
 Trapeyevofxrjv eyco veos cov, €K€lvov paXa 8ij totc 
 ovtos 7rp€a(3vTov ; 
 
 HE. Tw pep, co "EcoKpare?, olXvttco? re koll evrjvlco? 
 
 The use of the auxiliary verb 
 (see Gen. In trod.) is a feature 
 of Plato's later style : and is 
 one of the points in which that 
 style approximates to the lan- 
 guage of tragedy. 
 
 2. (tcoBas rj§iov~\ " Do you 
 commonly prefer 1 ?" 
 
 3. (laKpcp \6yco 8te{;iei>ai Xeywj/] 
 
 There is a slight emphasis on 
 Ae'ywj/. " Do you prefer to en- 
 large in an extended speech on 
 the subject which you desire 
 to explain, or to discuss the 
 matter (8u£ievai) by means of 
 questions, a practice Avhich I 
 remember that Parmenides 
 used — ?" 
 
 4. oiov ^pco/ieVw] oiov is 
 
 cognate or adverbial accus., 
 like tl — rjyoiivTo above. Com- 
 pare Theset. 170 b: 7-1 — XPV- 
 aofieda tw Aoyw, and Lys. 213c: 
 t'i ovv 8rj xpTjo-wfxeda, where 
 there is an ellipse of the da- 
 tive, 7U Xoyw or to"ls Xoyoiy, as 
 here. It seems probable that 
 the Parmenides had been com- 
 posed, or at least planned, when 
 this passage and Theret. 184 a 
 were written. 
 
 8. To} — aXvnas re Kai evr)- 
 viu>s 7rpo(r5iaXsyojiteVw] " With a 
 
 respondent who gives no trou- 
 ble and is guided easily." It 
 
 must be acknowledged that 
 most of the respondents in 
 Plato's dialectical dialogues 
 have this virtue. They an- 
 swer in the spirit of the ques- 
 tioner, and accept true reason- 
 ing when it is placed before 
 them. When a sally is per- 
 mitted them, this is obviously 
 done either for the sake of 
 relieving the gravity of the 
 argument, or in order that 
 they may derive instruction 
 from their own mistakes, or 
 thirdly, in one or two rare 
 cases, that they may shew that 
 the highest truths are some- 
 times the intuitions of the 
 simple mind. Docility in the 
 pupil as well as the mens 
 divinior in the teacher is re- 
 quired for the purposes of dia- 
 lectic. This is less obviously 
 the case in the Republic and 
 Phsedo, where Glaucon and 
 Adimautus, Simmias and Cebes, 
 are allowed to propound their 
 difficulties, thus exhibiting an- 
 other aspect of the philosophic 
 spirit. Yet Glaucon claims the 
 merit of being a more facile 
 respondent than some others 
 would be. Rep. 5, 474 a : ta-cas 
 
 av aWov rov f/x/ieXfcrrepni/ dno- 
 Kpivotfxrjv. Cf. Legg. 7, 797 d. It 
 
 1 1 e choo < 
 to pro© 1 d 
 
 li_\ qui =- 
 
 tions, a 1 
 Parmeni- 
 des used, 
 and accepts 
 
 Theietetus 
 for his re- 
 spondent : 
 who, when 
 tired, will 
 be relieved 
 by Socra- 
 tes the 
 younger. 
 
10 
 
 OAATONOS 
 
 TrpouSiaAeyofitvcD pa.ov ovtu), to irpo? aAkov 
 /,(?/, to Kaff amov. 
 
 2i7. ' EijeaTi Tolvvv twv TrapovTwv ov av fiovAijOrjv 
 eKAetjao-@a.r TrdvTts yap viraKOvaovTai aoi 7rpaco<>. 
 < crvpifiovAcp p.i)v ip.ol xpcopevo? tcov vecov tlvol aiprjo-ei, 
 QeamjTov TOv8e, i] kol tcov aAAcov ei riy croi kutu 
 vovv. 
 
 SE. 'O Sco/cpares", aidco? t'ls p! e^ei to vvv npcoTov 
 crvyyev6p.€vov v/uv prj Kara crpuKpov eiros irpos 67T09 
 
 d de p. 2 i 
 
 (I 
 
 is curious to observe that the 
 Heracliteims of Ephesus (Theret. 
 1 80) aud the extreme mate- 
 rialists (Soph. 246) are de- 
 spaired of in this respect as 
 being incapable of dialectic, rod 
 
 dovvai kci\ de^ao-dai Xoyoj/. For 
 the use of npos in irpooSiake- 
 yopeva, compare Theaet. 162 b, 
 irpoo-nakauiv; ib. 169 C, ivpoo-ava- 
 Tpiy^dpevos ; and for inraKOvcrov- 
 
 rai TTpdas, paullo infra, cf. Theset. 
 162 a ". pah' eppeXas o~oi i(paLv€TO 
 vTraKoveiv. The community of 
 spirit between those convers- 
 ing is also dwelt on in Ph?ed. 
 58 d : Kai p,rjv, w ^aidcov, Ka\ rovs 
 aKovaopevovs ye toiovtovs aWovs 
 e'xeis. The adj. evrjvios occurs 
 with the ethical meaning = 
 obedient, tractable, Legg. 5, 
 730 b, 9, 880 a. 
 
 I. to npos ciXXov — to Kad' 
 qvtov] Sc. 8ie£ievai tovs Xoyovs. 
 
 4. TTpaas = ov 8vo~peva>s oi8e 
 
 paxrjTiKu?, Theset. 168 b. 
 
 5. tu>v vecov tivo] As being 
 free from prepossessions and 
 more supple to follow the wind- 
 ings of an argument, cf. Parm. 
 
 137 b : 6 vemTdTOs ; ^/ciara yap 
 av TTchvirpaypovol, Ka\ a o'lerai 
 
 fiaXiaT av aivoKpLvoiTo. Theait. 
 162 b : prj (\k(lv irpos to yvpvd- 
 o-iov o-KXrjpov rjSrj ovra, rw 8e 8tj 
 veoiTepai nal vyporepa ovti Trpoana- 
 Xaieiv. Ib. 146 b. 
 
 8. atScbj tls p f'x et ] "•" s01 't °f 
 
 modesty comes over me at the 
 thought of continuing our in- 
 terview not colloquially but by 
 spinning a lengthened mono- 
 logue by myself, or even ad- 
 dressing myself to another at 
 length, which would only be a 
 kind of display. For the truth 
 is, that the word you have 
 now given us is not of such 
 easy compass as one might ex- 
 pect on hearing the question, 
 but requires an immense 
 amount of discussion." 
 
 to vvv'] The Vatican MS. (A) 
 and the Bodleian a and Venetian 
 (n) first hand have preserved a 
 reading tov vovv, which is partly 
 due to the preceding vovv, and 
 partly to the intelligibleness of 
 the phrase al8d>s p exei tov vovv. 
 But irpwTov could have no mean- 
 ing without vvv, and the article 
 is required to mark the limita- 
 tion of the preceding clause. 
 
 9. ems ivpbs eTros] Cf. Ari- 
 
 The Bodleian has tui 
 
 with the omicron erased. 
 
p. 21 7. TTOiHaOou Tt]v avvovalav, dXX eKTelvavTa a.7rop(.i]KV- 
 c veiv Xoyov o~v)(vov kclt e/xavTov, eire kou irpos tTepov, 
 oiov tiridei^LV TTOiovfievov' tco yap ovtl to vvv pi-jOlv 
 ov% oaov coSe tpcoTrjOev eXTrlaeiev av ai)TO eivai tls; 
 aXXa Tvyyavei Xoyov TrapiprjKOvs ov. to 8e av aoi 5 
 per) ^apl^eaOai kou TolaSe, aXXco? re kou aov Xe'tjavTos 
 coy elire?, a^evov tl KaTa^alveTai p.ot kou aypiov. eireX 
 
 p. 218. QeaiTrjTov ye tov it poaScaXeyopievov eivai 8e\opat 
 iravTonraaiv eij wv amos re rrpoTepov 8t.elXeypL.ai kou 
 av to. vvv p.01 SiaKeXevei. 10 
 
 2CKM2TH2. 
 
 11 
 
 stopll. Nub. 1379 : ndvTevdev pev, 
 olov eUos, eiros np6s enos rjpeido- 
 peada. And for the construc- 
 tion, see note on Thefet. 193 d: 
 
 Se£ta els dpicrrepa perappeov- 
 
 CTTjS. 
 
 1. eKTelvavra — <tvxvov~] Cf. 
 Prot. 329 a, b : coairep to. x a ^-~ 
 K(7a irXijyevTa paupbv foei Kal 
 dnoTelvei — Kal oi py'jropes ovtco 
 boXi\bv KaraTeivovcri tov Xoyov. 
 The whole passage should be 
 compared, also ib. 335 a, and 
 infr. 268 b. eKTelvavra dTTopr r 
 Kvvetv is probably a metaphor 
 taken from the act of drawing- 
 out a thread in spinning, " to 
 spin off a long yarn by my- 
 self." 
 
 2 . et're — iroiovpevov] As in 
 the conversation of Protagoras 
 with Socrates and Hippocrates 
 in Prot. 316-318. On the 
 other hand, the mythe and ar- 
 gument of Protagoras, pp. 320- 
 328, are not addressed to any 
 one in particular, and might 
 be said to be uttered either els 
 
 to pecrov or Kad' eavTov. 
 
 4. o&x oaov code epcorrjdev (fiai- 
 verai] Cf. Theeet. 1 47 d : 'Padiov, 
 go ScoKpares, vvv ye ovtco (palveraC 
 
 drap KLvbvveveis epcordv olov k.t.X. 
 
 For the participle, cf. Phileb. 
 14 c: ev — to. TroXXa eivai Kal to 
 ev iroXXa QavpaaTov Xe%8ev. 
 
 5. Xoyov TrapprjKovs ov] " Re- 
 quiring a lengthened argu- 
 ment." Cf. Eep. 3, 414 c: nelaai 
 de av\vr)s ireidovs. Legg. 5, 730 : 
 noXXrjs evXafteias. 
 
 6. aov Xe^avTos cos elires] i. e. 
 
 so courteously — referring chief- 
 ly to the opening words of 
 Socrates. Note the studied 
 variation of XegavTos — etires. 
 
 7. cigevcv] " Uncivil ;" in- 
 consistent with the courtesy 
 due to strangers. Cf. Eur. Fr. 
 ap. Stob. Fl. 126, 6: 'Aw)/j 
 
 tjevoiaiv ci^evos. 
 
 KaracpuiveTai] A strength- 
 ened, perhaps chiefly poetical, 
 form of cpaiverai = " appears dis- 
 tinctly." Cf. Horn. H. Ap.431, 
 
 and compare Kadopav, KaTidelv, 
 
 KClTdKOlKLV. 
 
 eirei] " It were yngi'acious : 
 for I can make no objection to 
 the respondent whom you offer 
 to me." Theaetetus had joined 
 in the conversation between 
 the Stranger and Theodorus on 
 the way. 
 
 C 2, 
 
12 
 
 IIAAT12N02 
 
 OEAI. ' ApOLTOlVVV, CO tjeVC, OVTCO KOU, KaOdlTtp eiTVe ]> 
 
 ^coKparys, iraai KeyapiaLievos e<rei ; 
 
 SE. KtvSvvevei 717509 p.ev ram a ov8ev eri XeKTeou 
 
 eivai, Qealrrjre' irpo9 8e ire ijSrj to ixera tovto, cos* 
 
 5€0iK€ } ylyvovr av 6 Xoyo?. av f)' apa tl tw lli)kcl 
 
 ttovcov ct)(6r], fiii ifxe alriaaOai tovtcov, aAAa rovade 
 
 tov? crov? eralpovs. 
 
 0EAI. 'AAA' oi/jLai p.ev 8r) vvv ovtcos ovk tarepelv' 1> 
 av 8' apa tl tolovtov ylyvrjrai, /cat rov8e 7rapaAr)\\ro- 
 o jieOa ^coKparrj, rbv "ScoKparov? ptev optcovvpLOV, efxbv 
 Se i]Xlklcoti]v koll avyyvp.vaaTi]v, cp Gwoiairovelv iier 
 epLOv ra iroWa ovk wqOes. 
 
 HE. Ei) Ae'yei?, kol ram a p.ev 18 la ftovAevaei 
 
 agreed as TTpOlOVTOS TOV AOyOV' KOLVYj Oe p.eT epLOV CTOL CTVCT- 
 
 to the name 
 
 18. 
 
 I. 
 
 We are 
 
 I. ? Apa rolvvv — etret ;] "Will 
 you then in this (in select- 
 ing me) be doing also what 
 Socrates desired — ministering 
 to the gratification of all pre- 
 sent 1 " Ka\ is separated from 
 Traa-L /ce^. e<rei by the insertion 
 of the clause Kaddrrep (lire 2co- 
 Kpdrrjs. So infr. p. 241 c: Ka\, 
 Kaddnep vvv «Vey, dyaTTTjo-eLi ; 
 Tim. 20 C : ml pev S17, Kaddnep 
 fine Tipaios 6'Se, k.t.A. Thea?t. 
 2IO b : Kai, vai pa. At" e'ycoye, 
 7rXet'co k.t.X. eiVe 2. refers to rjpmv 
 — aiTTj(rdvTa>v x^P iv j m which 
 words Socrates had included 
 all present. 
 
 3. KivSvvevei — eraipovs] A 
 murmur of assent from the by- 
 standers must be supposed to 
 follow Thesetetus' words. 
 
 5. rco prjKei TTovav] Stallbaum, 
 in his note, has substituted 
 ttovcov for 7rova>v, but the par- 
 ticiple is obviously right. For 
 
 the dative, cf. Soph. Track 
 681 : ttovcov TrXevpav iriKpa yha- 
 
 6. fit/ ifie curiao-dai] Bodl.Vat. 
 Ven. n. p.e. The infinitive is 
 a softened imperative, cf. Rep. 
 5, 473 a; infr. 262 e: av pot 
 
 <ppd£eiv. 
 
 9. iav Se — 2<i>KpdTrf\ So Pro- 
 
 tarchus relieves Philebus, when 
 tired. Phileb. 1 1 c : dvdyKt) 
 
 bix^o-dai, <J>i'X?y/3oj yap r)p1v 6 
 KaXos aTreiprjKev. 
 
 i 2. ra 7roXXa is better taken 
 as cognate accusative after 
 o-wbiaTToveiv than as adverbial to 
 ovx. drjOes. " Who is well used 
 in most thiugs to share labours 
 with me." Young Socrates ap- 
 pears in the Theagtetus as a 
 mute personage, and shares 
 the credit of the geometrico- 
 arithmetical definition of the 
 irrational roots. Theret. 147, 
 148. 
 
2CXM2THZ. 
 
 18 
 
 21 8. K€7TT€0U ap^OfieVCO TTpCOTOl/, COS" €fJLOL (pCUl/€Tai, VVV OTTO 
 ", (j-jTOVVTL KCU t\ltyavi(pVTl AoyO) TL 7TOT 
 
 TOV CTOCpiCTTOV, 
 
 ear 1. vvv 
 
 yap 81] av [re] Kayco tovtov irepi Tovvo/xa 
 /jlovov e'xp/jiev KOtvrj' to 8e epyov, i(f> co KaAodfiev, 
 
 1. vvv, which is opposed 
 to Trpo'iovros r. X., and would 
 be joined most naturally with 
 arvo-nenTeov, appears to be dis- 
 placed by a conversational 
 hyperbaton, perhaps to avoid 
 the hiatus cpalverai — ano, per- 
 haps drawn by a sort of at- 
 traction to the words which 
 indicate the immediate subject 
 of discourse, vvv is again dis- 
 placed, apparently for euphony, 
 infr. 221 c, 231 b; cf. also 
 Legg. 1, 627 b : to d' ino o~ov 
 Xeyopevov fj.avda.va> vvv. 
 
 2. efi<pavi£ovTi Xoyw] " Mak- 
 ing clear by argument." Dia- 
 lectic is at once a process of 
 discovery and of proof, ipcpavl- 
 (ovrt of course agrees with 0-01 
 and not with I/mm, as Ast seems, 
 by some strange oversight, to 
 have supposed. Xdya> is slightly 
 emphatic, and is referred to in 
 what immediately follows. ovo- 
 pa = the name, is distinguished 
 on the one hand from epyov 
 or irpayiia, the thing, and on 
 the other from \6yos, the de- 
 finition or true conception of 
 the thing. For the former, cf. 
 
 Cratyl. 413 e : avTO prjvvei to 
 epyov to ovopa fj avpela, and for 
 
 the latter, Theset. 202, which 
 is closely related to the pre- 
 sent passage. The conception 
 of \6yos is the same in this 
 place as in the conclusion of 
 the Thea?tetus, viz. definition 
 through division or the ex- 
 pression of the characteristic 
 difference, epyov and Xdyo? are 
 
 here correlative, and not op- 
 posed, as in the common anti- 
 thesis epya> ov Xo'yw. The union 
 01 both, to irpaypa avTo 81a \6ya>v, 
 
 is opposed to the mere name, 
 
 to b'popa povov X^P^ Xdyou. The 
 
 variation of epyov and irpaypa is 
 perhaps due to the same re- 
 finement to which that of cpi,- 
 \ov and yevos is owing. But 
 epyov is rather the Sophist's 
 function, irpaypa simply the 
 thing meant by the word. Cf. 
 also Legg. 9, 864 b : rjplv fie 
 
 OVK eCTTl TO. vvv ovopuTcov nepi 
 ovo-epis Xdyoy. lb. I o, 895 d : 
 
 9 > > * >/|/x \ t 1 
 
 ap ovk av eueAois rrepi eKao~Tov 
 
 Tpia voelv, ev pev ttjv ovalav, ev 
 
 fie ttjs cvaias tov \6yov, ev fie to 
 ovopa k.t.X. lb. 12, 964 a: ovco- 
 irapev tov eifidra iKavas irep\ usvtl- 
 vcovovv, ois eo-TL pev ovopa, eari o' 
 av Ka\ Xdyos, iroTepov povov eirlara- 
 o-Qai Tovvopa xpeav *] tov ye ovTa 
 tl Ka\ irep\ tcjv 8ia(pep6vTccv peyedei 
 Ka\ KaXXei iravTa to. ToiavTa ayvo- 
 elv alo~xpov. (pv~kov, tribe, is a 
 more poetical, because a newer, 
 metaphor, for the idea of Sort 
 or Kind than yevos, race or 
 family. The search for the 
 Sophist is spoken of as a 
 branch of natural history. For 
 to ovopa — crvvcopoXoyrjaao-dai, cf. 
 Theset. 164 c : Trpds Tas t£>v 
 ovopaTcov SpoXoyias 6po\oyr]o~d- 
 pevoi. 
 
 3. av [re] Kaya>] The Bodleian 
 MS. gives o-v nay io with the 
 rest, except Flor. i. 
 
 4. e(p' co KaXovpev] Sc. to 
 ovopa. 
 
 "Sophia*." 
 our objeci 
 ia bo defin< 
 tin; thing, 
 and so to 
 bring to 
 light the 
 conception 
 
U 
 
 1IAATQNQ2 
 
 which, it 
 
 may be, we 
 
 llHVt: si'Vc- 
 
 rally within 
 our minds. 
 
 Great sub- 
 jects, it has 
 long been 
 felt,' should 
 be ap- 
 proached 
 through 
 easy exam- 
 ples. And, 
 as the So- 
 phist is a 
 creature 
 difficult to 
 
 eKUTepo? rax av iota Trap yptv avTOLg €\oip.eV fiei \>. z\H. 
 Se del ttolvtos irept to irpdypa avTo ptaXXov did 
 Xoycov rj tovvo/jlci povov crvvopoXoyrjo~ao~0ai \cop19 
 Xoyov. to 8e (pvXov, o vvv eirtvoovpev (jjTe'iv, ov 
 
 5 TTaVTCOV paCTTOP CTvXXafiuv Tl TTOT €0~TIV, 6 aOffjLO-TT}?. 
 
 baa 8" av tcov peyaXcov Set hiairoveiaOat KaXtos, irept 
 tcov tolovtcov Se'SoKTai irdat kcu irdXai to irpoTepov 
 ep crpLiKpois Ka\ paoaiv am a 8etv p.e\eTav, irptv iv <\ 
 avTois rots peyicrTois. vvv ovv, cb QeaLTrjTe, eycoye 
 io/cat vcov ovtco avp(3ovXevco, ^aAe7ro^ kol SvaOrjpevTOV 
 
 4. to Be (pvXop — 6B6p] " Now 
 the Sophist tribe, which we are at 
 present minded to examine, is of 
 a nature which is not the easiest 
 in the world to comprehend. 
 Again, when a great subject is 
 to be adequately handled, it 
 has long since been the ap- 
 proved course in such a case 
 to try one's hand upon the 
 question in trivial and easy 
 instances, before attempting 
 it in the great matter which 
 has been undertaken. On 
 the present occasion there- 
 fore, Theaetetus, I would re- 
 commend that you and I, con- 
 sidering the Sophist to be of a 
 kind which is difficult to cap- 
 ture and to chase, should try 
 our prentice hand on some 
 easier quarry, and make this a 
 preparatory study of the way 
 to find him, unless you have 
 at your command some more 
 feasible proposal." Perhaps in 
 ttjp fxidoBop avrov there is an 
 allusion to the literal mean- 
 ing of fieTiepai, ' to pursue.' Cf. 
 infr. 235 d. 
 
 ov TraPTcup paorop] Cf. inf. 
 244 c. In Eep. 6, 497 d, ov 
 
 iravras pqenop 8ie\8elp, ttuptodp 
 should probably be read. 
 
 7. Kal 7rdXai] " Even from of 
 old." Not only now but long 
 ago. Cf. Thea?t. 202 d : kcu 
 7roXXot. 
 
 to — Belp] The article marks 
 the infinitive as the subject of 
 the verb. 7repi tS>p tolovtcop may 
 be construed with BsBoktuc, but 
 belongs rather to the whole 
 sentence. "In dealing with such 
 subjects it has long been the 
 general opinion that one should 
 first exercise inquiry on lesser 
 and easier topics." avTa is vague, 
 resuming to>p toiovtwp, but in a 
 more general sense = the inquiry 
 or the method of procedure. 
 
 I O. ^aXenop — npopikeTqp] These 
 words are in apposition to ovtco 
 
 after o~vp.[3ov\eva>. xakewop = 
 
 "troublesome." As if he were 
 some animal we were trying to 
 lay hold of. Cf. Polit. 273b: 80-a 
 
 XaXeTra tus <fivo~€is \8C.Tc0v 6r)picop), 
 and Eep. 6, 493 b : ottot^ x a ^ e ~ 
 
 TTCOTCITOP KOI TTpdOTdTOP KOI (K tLpCCP 
 
 yiypeTai. The metaphor, which 
 appears very slightly in to <pv- 
 Xop — o-vWapelv, is more dis- 
 tinctly present here, and in 
 
20M2TH2. 
 
 15 
 
 ip. 2] 8. yyrjaapevoLs elvai to tov aocjjiaTov yevos wporepov tv catch, it is 
 aAXcp paovi ti]v pWodov glvtov irpopeXeTav, d fir) av t. 
 
 TTO06V €VTreT6(TT€pai> €)(€L? €L7TeLV 6lXXt]V 6SoV- with him. 
 
 0EAI. 'AAA' ovk ex&). 
 
 HE. BofAef Sijra ivepi tlvos tcov obavXwv pceriovTes 5 
 7reipa&cop.€V Trapadeiypa avro OeaOaL tov /W(Wo9 ; 
 e 0EAI. Not. 
 
 3?E. Tfc ^ra 7rpoTatjaLpi€0' av evyvcoaTov pev Let the 
 
 v / x / *v » v >. / ,/ „ angler be 
 
 /cat apLKpov, Xoyov oe p-yoevo? eXarrova e^ov tcov our ex- 
 
 yi t > / 9 ' ' " / / ample, in 
 
 peiCpvcov ; Oio*/ acnraXievT-qs' ap ov iracn re yi/co- 10 which to 
 
 v ^~j/ \ \ ~ \ j /s. practise the 
 
 /)£/UOI> Kdl <JTTOVOr]S OV TTO.VV TL 7TOXXrj? TLVOS eiTa^LOV ; method of 
 
 0EAI. OShws. definition " 
 
 p. 219. HE. Me'#oSof yu?)y avTov iXiri^co kcli Xoyov ovk 
 dv€7TLTr}8eLov rjpuv €)(eiv 7rpos* o /3ovXop.e0a. 
 
 0EAI. KaXcos av e'xoi. i 5 
 
 the word 8vo-6fjpevrov, which is 
 partly suggested by x a ^ e7T0V 
 and partly by ov pddiov o-vXXa- 
 pelv, the image of the chase, 
 which is continued afterwards, 
 is fully brought out. 
 
 2. ttjv pedobov clvtov TTpo/xeXe- 
 Tav\ " To practise beforehand 
 the method, which is proper 
 to be applied to him." For the 
 genitive avrov, see below : \xi6o- 
 dov jir/v avrov £Km£w — ^X elVt 
 
 For iroSev, cf. Polit. 257 d : 
 Kivhweverov ap.<fia> TToBev epol crvy- 
 yevetav e'xeiv rivd. 
 
 5. /xeriwres] Used absolutely, 
 as in Protag. 350 d : el ovra p,e- 
 Tiav epoio p,e. It is natural that 
 words like p-enevac and xpw® ai 
 (supr. 217 c), which recur often 
 with the same object (\6yos), 
 should sometimes be used 
 alone. 
 
 6. 7rapd8eiypa Oeivai] Cf. Polit. 
 
 277 c sqq., where the nature 
 of such examples is explained. 
 The "large letters" of the Ee- 
 public afford an apparent in- 
 stance of the converse method. 
 But in each case the inquiry 
 advances from the less known 
 to the more known. 
 
 8. 7rpo7-a|ai/xe^' av] Sc. {JlTeiv 
 or periivai. 
 
 10. oiov acmaXuvTris] The con- 
 struction is absolute. Cf.Theset. 
 
 178 C : oiov 6epp.d ; dpa k.t.A. 
 Euthyd. 302 a : olov @ovs nai 
 Trpopara, dpa k.t.X. alib. 
 
 11. 011 irdvv tl 77oX\rjs rivos] 
 
 " Worth no very great amount 
 of interest." 
 
 15. KaXcos ni» e^oj] " That is 
 well." The expression is slightly 
 hypothetical. Thesetetus takes 
 the Stranger's word for what 
 he himself does not clearly 
 see. 
 
Ui 
 
 1IAAT12N02; 
 
 He is an 
 artist, and 
 there are 
 two kinds 
 
 of art : 
 
 HE. <be'pe <5//, Tij8e dp)(co/ie0a auruv. Kai /wi Xeye' p. -Hy 
 
 TTOTtpOV G)$ TeytVLTTjV ttVTOV t) TLVO. <ZT€)(VOV, CiKXrjV 8t 
 
 Svvafuv eyovTa, Orjaopev ; 
 
 0EAI. 'H/acrra ye areyyov. 
 5 HE. 'AAAa fxyu twv ye Teyycov Traacov aye&bv 
 e\Si] Svo. 
 
 0EAI. n^; 
 
 HE. Tecopyia \xev kcli bar) irep\ to Ovtjtov ttolv 
 crcopa Oepcnrela, to t€ av irepl to ^vvOeTOV kou 
 io7r\ao-Tou, o 8r) avceuo? (ovopaKa/iev, i) re /JLiprjTiK^, b 
 ^vpiravTa Tama SiKaioTaT av ev\ tt poaay opevoiT av 
 
 OVOpLOTl. 
 
 0EAI. Tlcos kou tivl; 
 
 HE. Hav birep av fir) irpbrepov tls bv vaTepov eh 
 
 i. airov is probably neuter. 
 
 Cf. Rep. 2, 369 b : ei yiy vopevrjv 
 tioKlv 6eao-aipeda Aoy<a — ovkovv 
 yevopevov aiirov. 
 
 2. (irexvov, ciXhrjv 6e ovvapiv 
 
 e'xovTa] For the qualifying- 
 clause with §e, compare Polit. 
 
 277 C ' tols 8' aXkoLs 81a %ei- 
 
 povpyiav, et passim ; and for 
 the etymological use of a.Ttx vov -> 
 cf. Theset. 168 a: ami — (piXoa-o- 
 cpav pio-ovvras tovto to irpaypa. 
 Legg. 7; 8 TO a: (pi\oo-o<frovvTa 
 pr]8e picrovvTa. lb. 10, 886 c : 
 Oioyoviav — yevopevoi re u>s Trpbs 
 akXrjkovs 6)pihrjo~av. 
 
 4. "Hklo-to. ye] ye, though 
 
 omitted by the Bodleian MS., 
 with All, is probably right, and 
 expresses assent to the meaning 
 of the question. 
 
 8. nav aapa] " All," col- 
 lectively, as in Ar. Eth. Nic. 
 
 I. 13. § 7 '• o(fi6a\p6v Kai ttclv 
 (Tcbpa. For (TKiVOS = $-vv8(Tov 
 
 Kai ivkao-Tov, cf. Hep. 2, 38 1 a : 
 
 Kai pijv Kai to. ye i^vvdera 
 ■navTa, aKevr] re Kai olKodoprjpara 
 
 Kai dpcpieo-paTa. o-Kevos here de- 
 notes what is manufactured, 
 (compounded or moulded,) as 
 distinguished from organized 
 bodies; cf. Eep. 10, 596 d. 
 a<bpa acquires a still more 
 general meaning in Phileb. 29 
 d, infr. 246 a. 
 
 1 1 . SiKaiorar av eVt] The Bod- 
 leian, with a corrector of the 
 Coislinian MS., gives pi> twice 
 over, after 8iKai6rara and -npoa- 
 
 ayopevoiro. 
 
 1 4. Uav oTrep] " In the case of 
 everything, which — ." The ac- 
 cusative is placed, as if abso- 
 lutely, at the beginning of the 
 sentence, and is rather governed 
 by cpapev than by Syovra. Cf. 
 
 Polit. 295 d : TTCLV TO TOIOVTOV £vp- 
 
 Paivov, where the accusative is 
 absolute. And infr. t6 — padrjpa- 
 tik6v — et'Sos. For the meaning, cf. 
 Theset. 155 b : o pi) npoTepov fy, 
 
SOM2TH2. 
 
 17 
 
 iy. ovaiav ayy, rov \xev ayovru iroLelv, to 8e ayo\xevov 
 TTOieiaOai irov (j)afui>. 
 
 6EAI. 'OpOm. 
 
 HE. Ta 8e ye vvv 8rj [a] 8ir']A0opev airavTa ei^ev 
 els tovto tx]v olvtcdv 8vvat±iv. 5 
 
 0EAI. Ei'xe yap ovv. 
 
 HE. Y]oli]tiki)v tolvvv aura avyKe(PaAaicoadfxevoL 
 TrpoaeLTTCojiev. 
 c 0EAI. "Eo-rco. 
 
 SE. To 5?) pLaOrjfAaTiKov av fierce tovto elSo? oAov io 
 /cat ro r?79 yvcopiaecos to re ^pi]/xaTiaTLKov koll ay to- 
 
 ol 
 
 uXXu varepov tovto elvai livev tov 
 yevea6ai Kai yiyue(T0cu cibvvaTov ; 
 Symp. 205 b : »/ yap rot eV tov 
 firi ovtos els to bv Iovti 6t(oovv 
 atria ndo-d iort Trolqais. Pro- 
 duction is more fully desci'ibed 
 in Legg. 10, 894 a: ylyverat 
 
 5/) ndvrcov yeveo-is, rjviK av ri nddos 
 f] \ 8r]Kov cos oiiQTav dp^rj \a(3ovo~a 
 av£r]v els ttjv 8evTepav e\8{] /xerd- 
 (3ao-iv, koX dnb ravrr^s els ti)v ttAt/- 
 o~lov, kcli pexP 1 T p l <<> v eXdovcra 
 aladrjo-iv o~XJ] Tols alo-davofievots. 
 
 4. Ta Se ye vvv 8r) [a] 8ltj\6o- 
 /xei'] " But those things which 
 we just now enumerated." a is 
 omitted in the Bodleian and 
 seven other MSS. The reading 
 
 a 8e ye vvv 8rj 8ir)\6ou.ev, which is 
 
 adopted by the Zurich editors, 
 is due to a corrector of the 
 Coislinian MS. But the read- 
 ing in the text is preferable 
 as being less obvious ; and the 
 inversion (vvv 81) d for a vvv S17) 
 is in the manner of these dia- 
 logues. (The old edd. had vvv 
 a 8>} with B E F.) 
 
 For Td — a, cf. Rep. 8, 585 b : 
 
 to 0101/ a irov re (cat ttotov ku\ b\j/ov. 
 10. To 81] — Tvptnci yap «i>] 
 
 " Well, if we take next to this 
 the whole department of learn- 
 ing and of acquiring know- 
 ledge, with those of money- 
 making, contention and pursuit, 
 since none of these produces, 
 but they are engaged either in 
 conquering, or in preventing 
 men from conquering, that 
 which already exists and has 
 been produced, — on account 
 of all these sections, it will ap- 
 pear most suitable to use the 
 term ' acquisitive art.' " "It 
 will indeed wear an appro- 
 priate look." Observe that no 
 attempt is made to look for the 
 Sophist either in the padrjp.aTi- 
 
 kov or yvcopio'TiKov el8os tu>v Te%- 
 vav. The construction of the 
 sentence is not determined from 
 the beginning, but the accusa- 
 tives (which are resumed in 
 TavTa i-vvdiravTa to. p-eprj) simply 
 
 follow the analogy of ttoitjtlktjv 
 
 — axiTa. 
 
 p.adr]u.aTiKbv] So the Bod- 
 leian MS. Here, as in Ar. Met. 
 I. 1, the MSS. vary between 
 
 u-aBquaT. and p.a6rjT. 
 
IS 
 
 FIAATQNOS 
 
 Ami an art 
 
 of getting. 
 
 The an- 
 gler's is an 
 art of get- 
 ting. 
 
 vicniKov koli OijpevriKov, — iirevbrj Siyuovpyu. pclv uvoev p. 219. 
 tovtcov, ra 8e ovra koll yeyovora r« fitv yeipovrou 
 Aoyoi? koll Trpaijeai, tu 8e toi? yeipovixevois ovk 
 t7riTp€7r€i, — \mkicrT av nov 81a. ravra ^vvairavra ra 
 5 fiepy rtyyr) ris KTr/riKi] XeyOeiaa av Stair ptyeiev. 
 
 GEAI. Ngu' irpliroi yap av. 
 
 £?E. KrrjriKrj? 81] Ka\ 7roirjTiKr]<; ^v/nraacov ovacov d 
 rcov reyycov eV rrorepa rrjv aairaXievTiK-qv, co Qeal- 
 rrjre, ridco/iev; 
 
 ° GEAI. 'Ei> KTYjTLKfl 7T0V 8rjAoV. 
 
 2. ra pev xeipovrai Xoyots] Cf. 
 Eutliyd. 290 b, where geometers 
 &c.are classed amongst 8-qpevrai. 
 
 4. eTTiTpsTre 1] SC. X.eipoiHT0aiavrd. 
 fiaKuTT av ttov — 8itt7rpe\|/-eiei>] 
 
 So Bocll. a. n. i. : cett. 8iaypd- 
 •fyeuv. If we compare the cor- 
 responding clause in the pre- 
 ceding context, supr. b, £vp- 
 iravra ravra — ovopari, it ap- 
 pears that no rendering of 
 these words is satisfactory 
 which separates ravra from 
 
 ^vvdnavra ra pepr] ■ (e. g. Stallb. 
 
 " maxime propterea has partes 
 cunctas — dici decebit :" which 
 is also objectionable because 
 of the harshness of the at- 
 traction, Aex<9etrra for Xf^eVra). 
 The same objection holds (un- 
 less but were omitted) against 
 the reading hiaypd-fyeiev, which 
 was justly suspected on other 
 grounds by Heindorf. Hence 
 the preceding accusatives, 
 which are absolute, are re- 
 sumed with a new construc- 
 tion in ravra ^vvdnavra ra. pepr] '. 
 and the words mean either, as 
 above rendered, " an art of ac- 
 quisition is the most suitable 
 to be named on account of all 
 
 these parts" (cf. Polit. 269 c : 
 
 Trpe^et prjdev. lb. 288 C : rovro 
 — rovroLS ev ovopa anaa-iv npeyj/ei 
 
 irpouayopevdi'v), or, by a return 
 to poetical usage, suggested by 
 the rare verb, Sid may per- 
 haps be construed "through- 
 out," and Sianpeyf/etev may re- 
 tain something of the original 
 meaning of " looking brightly 
 forth." " An art of acquisition 
 will, when named, be seen 
 clearly to peiwade all these 
 sections." Cf. Emped. Fr. w. 
 
 5,6: rpls pev pvplas a>pas dno paKa- 
 pa>v dXaXrjcrBai, yeivopevov irafTOia 
 8 id xp* a eiSea 6vr}ra>v. Horn. 
 Hymn to Hermes, w. 350, 1 : 
 ocppa pev ovv e'SiWe Sid i|/ap.a- 
 0w8ea \S>pov, pela pdX i^via 
 ivavra Sie'irpeTrei' ev Kovirjaiv. The 
 latter interpretation makes the 
 anacoluthon easier, and gives 
 a more appropriate meaning 
 to the compound verb, but is 
 too singular to be asserted with 
 confidence. For pd\i<rra, cf. infr. 
 
 2 66 a : TO) 8e VTTokoiTTO) o~)(e86v 
 
 pakirrr av ~keyoiadr]v el8oo\o7ro'iKa>. 
 
 6. npeivoL yap av] Sc. ovra 
 Xe^delcra. 
 
 IO. S^Xoi/] Sc. on. 
 
20<I>I2TH1\ 19 
 
 p. 219. aE. K.Tr)TiKr/s 8e dp ov 8vo e\8r) ; to pei> €k6i>tq)v 
 
 Trpo? €kovtol9 p.eTafi\r)TiKOV ov 8td re 8cope(ov koll 
 
 jXLaOcaireodv koll dyopdaeoov ; to 8e \ol7tov 77 /car Not by 
 ,/ * v . / / j., y contractoi 
 epya iq klxtcl Aoyovs yeipovpevov ^vpirav x €l P COTLKOi/ ,; ■■■ ' 
 ,x „ but con- 
 ay €LTJ ; 5 quest. 
 
 GEAI. ^aiVerat yovv e/c twv elp^pevoav. 
 
 (H*E. T/ 8e ; rr}f yeipadTiKTjV dp' ov 8l\t) TprjTeov ; 
 
 GEAI. IIt?; 
 
 e £JE. To /zej> dvaffiairSbir o\ov dycaviaTiKov -\6ev- An ' 1 tl,is 
 
 T€?~f , TO de KpV(j)OLOV aVTYJS irdv 6r)peVTlKOV. 10 force but 
 
 GEAI. Not. 
 
 aE. Ti]v 8e ye p.1^1/ 6f)pevTiK^v dXoyov to prj ov 
 Tep.veiv Sixfj- 
 
 GEAI. Aeye 07177. 
 
 mE. To pev axj/v^pv yevovs SieXop.€i>ovs, to b* 15 
 
 €fJL\jnJ)(OV. 
 
 GEAI. Tt pr)v ; elirep eo~Tov ye ap(f)to. 
 
 SE. IT coy 8e ovk eaTOv ; /cat <5e? ye rj/zay ro /ueV Now of 
 
 catching by 
 
 2. iAeTa(3\r)TiKov ov — ^etpcort/coi/ £u/M7raf] I. e. while undi- 
 au eirj] For the independent vided. So o\ov, nav, k.t.X., in 
 verb in the second of two de- what follows. 
 
 pendent clauses, see Theset. 9. forest] Sc. repvcopev. 
 
 149 e : bvvavrai. eyeipeiv re — /cat Bevras Heind. and Par. E. corr. 
 
 — dfxj3\io-Kovo-iv, et passim. The MS. confirmation is too 
 
 3. f) kcit epya rj koto. Xoyovs] slight to justify the admission 
 Like Xoyois kuI TTpa^eo-t above. of a conjecture, which must 
 Science is here included under however be regarded as pro- 
 xetpmriKi]. Knowledge is like bable. Cf. infr. dielopevovs. But 
 the kingdom of heaven, which see Polit. 302 d : kcu ravrrjv 
 the violent take by force. r^plv Beriov ecrrl 8ltt\?]v. JJas 6Y7 ; 
 
 4. xetpou/ueiw is possibly Kal rivi biaipovvres Tavrrjv. 
 
 passive, like dvao-TT<opevov, infr. 12. clXoyov] " Illogical." 
 
 221 (where see note), but this I. e. Undiscriminating : the 
 
 is less probable with the ac- function of Xdyoy being to dis- 
 
 tive xeipovTcit. preceding, supr. c. tinguish. Cf. Theret. sub fin. 
 
 See also 2 20 c: ro pev — 17. e'iirep ecrrov ye ap(pio] 
 
 ttouItcii ttjv drjpav. 225 C, dp<pi- I. e. if there is a di)pa twu 
 o-firjTOvv. dyjrvxoi'. 
 
20 
 
 IIAATONOS 
 
 craft i n< 
 kind pur- 
 sues in- 
 animate 
 tiling !, ill 
 othi i ani 
 
 A i (1 the 
 art of ani- 
 mal-catch- 
 ing* pursues 
 either land 
 or water- 
 prey. Of 
 aquatic 
 creatures, 
 some fly, 
 some only 
 swim ; 
 whence 
 fowling is 
 distin- 
 guished 
 from fish- 
 
 tu>u u\j/v)((oi>, dvowvpov *oj/*' irXrjV kclt evict ttjs p. 22(1 
 KoAvpfitjTiKi}'? olttu pepr) KCii TOiavT u\\a (3pa^e'a, 
 yalpeiv edaai, to 8e, rwv ep^rvytav (joocov ovaav 6i)pav, 
 Trpoaenreiv faoOypiKrjv. 
 
 5 0EAI. "E*TCO. 
 
 3*E. Z(ji)oOi]ptKrjs Se up' ov SnrAovv eiSo? av Ae- 
 yoiTO ev SiKr), to pev 7re(ou yei/ovs, TroAAot? eldeai 
 KCU ouopaat Str)pr)p€i>ov, TretpBypiKov. to 8" eTepov 
 vevaTiKov (a>ov rrav evvypo9r]piKQv ; 
 10 0EAI. Yldvv ye. 
 
 HE. NevcrTLKOv prjv to p.ev TTTTjvbv (jwAov opoopev. b 
 to Se evvdpov ; 
 
 0EAI. n»j 5' ov; 
 
 SE. Kcd tov TTT-qvov p.r)P ye'vovs wdaa rjplv 1) 
 ^bOi'-jpa XeyeTdi ttov tis bpviQevTiKr). 
 
 I. dva>vvp.ov *oj/*J MSH. iav 
 
 (sic Bodl.) ov is Heindorf's 
 conjecture. Cf. Polit. 260 e : 
 
 dvoovvp-ov ov Tvyxdvei to yevos. 
 
 The difference of tense (eai/ — 
 ecio-cu) forbids the notion of an 
 epexegesis like that in Legg. 
 3, 697 a : to 8e Tpixjj SieXelv — 
 
 TTeipadapev 8ta.Tcp.eiv. Cf., how- 
 ever, Parm. Fr. 73 : t^v pev iav 
 uvotjtov, dvcovvpov. Plat. Legg. 
 9, 878 b : dva>vvp.ov (av. 
 
 ttjs Ko\vfi(3r)TiKris arret /xep'/] 
 E. g. fj t£>v o~7royyoKo\vp.ftr}T(ov 
 6r)pa. V. Oppian Halieut. V. 
 612. 
 
 II. Net/o-rtKoG] "of Avhat 
 swims." The ai'ticle is some- 
 times omitted before a generic 
 or collective word. Cf. infr. 
 221 b : ^vfXTTao-r]s — Texv>]S. Mr. 
 
 Grote remarks on this (Plato, 
 (fee, vol. ii. p. 401): "Plato 
 considers the air as a fluid 
 
 in which birds swim." But 
 the vevo-TLKti TTTrji'd are the 
 water-foAvl. The expression 
 irao-a — t) drjpa below probably 
 implies that only a part of 
 opvidevTiKr] has been previously 
 mentioned. In Legg. 7, 824 c 
 the evvypoOijpevTrjs is distin- 
 guished from the 6pvi0evTrjs, 
 and is forbidden to exercise 
 his art in harbours, or in 
 sacred rivers, marshes, or 
 In the present passage 
 is distinguished from 
 "in wet" from "under 
 the former term in- 
 the latter. The Eleate 
 shews his dialectical skill in 
 proving that " aquatic sport" 
 is not an adecpiate definition 
 of the fisherman's craft. 
 
 14. Tvaaa — r) 6r)pa\ I.e. not 
 
 only of the v(vo-tik6v -m-qvov but 
 of all that flies. The objection 
 
 pools. 
 
 evvypos 
 
 evvdpos, 
 
 water," 
 
 cludinQ 
 
SO*I2TH2. 
 
 21 
 
 p. 220. 0EAI. Aeyerai yap ovv. 
 
 HE. ToV $€ €Vv8pGV 0~)(eSoV TU (TVV0A0V aAicvTiKr). 
 
 0EAI. Net/. 
 
 HE. T/ oY; Tavrr)i> av tijv Orjpav ap ovk av koltol 
 ixeyicrra pe'prj 8uo SieXolp.r]v ; 
 
 GEAI. Kara. irdla ; 
 
 HE. Ka0' a to pev epKecrtv uvtoOl ivoidraL ti)v 
 6-qpav, to Se irXrjyf}. 
 
 GEAI. ITw? Ae'yei?, kol 7777 8'iatpovp.evos eKa.Tepov\ 
 c HE. To /xeV, — otl irav ocrov av kveKa KoyAvaeoj? 
 etpyy tl Trepieyov, epKO? eiKo? ovopdteiv. 
 
 GEAI. Haw p.ev ovv. 
 
 HE. Kvprovs $7] Ka\ diKTva ko! fipoy(pvs /cod 
 TropKOVS Kal tol TOiavTa pccov aWo ti 7rXrjv IpKiq 
 \prj 7rpoaayopev€iv; 
 
 5 Offiabing 
 
 there are 
 two chief 
 parts, one 
 working by 
 enclosure, 
 as with 
 baskets, 
 creels, and 
 nets, the 
 10 other In- 
 striking ; 
 and this 
 sometimes 
 at night, 
 l>y torch- 
 light, some- 
 times by 
 day with 
 barbed 
 * points. 
 
 of Aristot., de Part. Anim. I. 2, 
 applies here : npoo-fjKfi pr) 81a- 
 cnrav emo-Tov yevos, oiov rovs opvi- 
 6as rovs pev iv 7776V tovs 8° ev 
 (iWrj diaipeau, Kado^'p e^ovatv al 
 yeypappevai 8iaipe<r'eis. 
 
 7. airodt] (Par. F. avTodev). 
 Either (if avrodi is emphatic, 
 for which somewhat rare use 
 in Attic cf. Legg. 3, 702 c), 
 " The one pursues his game 
 with enclosures in the very- 
 haunts of his prey." But the 
 adverb in this case belongs 
 rather to the noun than the 
 verb. Or, better, referring to 
 evvdpov supr., " The one pur- 
 sues his game there with en- 
 closures, the other by striking." 
 avToBi is then taken equally 
 with both clauses, and the sole 
 emphasis is laid on epKonv as 
 opposed to TrXijyfj. Plato im- 
 plies that the word epms is to 
 be derived from e'ipyw. 
 
 10. To pev — tolovtov] The sen- 
 tence is interrupted by the 
 minor premiss, Kvprovs k.t.X., in 
 which the general definition of 
 epKos is applied, and to pev is 
 more explicitly resumed in tovto 
 pev. tovto refers to the processes 
 connected with creels, nets, 
 and the other implements just 
 mentioned, amongst which nop- 
 kos seems to have been rather 
 a rush-basket than a net. " One 
 kind — since all that encloses 
 anything to prevent egress 
 may naturally be termed an en- 
 closure. (Certainly.) Whence 
 baskets and casting-nets, and 
 nooses and creels, and the like 
 must be called enclosures and 
 nothing else. (Exactly.) This 
 department therefore of the 
 sport we shall name 'fishing 
 by enclosure.' " 
 
 14. aAXo] Bodl. om. 
 
22 
 
 IIAATI2N02 
 
 0EAI. OvScv. 
 
 \). 220. 
 
 These are 
 either im- 
 pelled from 
 above, as 
 in spearing, 
 or jerked 
 up from be- 
 neath, with 
 canes or 
 rods, into 
 the head 
 or lips of 
 the prey. 
 
 HE. — Tovto p.ev dpa epnoOrjpLKov tijs dypa? to 
 
 fXtpOS (f))](TOfJL€V, ?} TL TOLOUTOV. 
 
 0EAI. Nat. 
 S aE, To de ayKLarpots kcil rpioSovai irXr)yfj yiyvo- 
 pcevov erepov p.ev eKelvov, 7tXi)ktlki]v 6Y tivol Qr)pav 
 rjpa.9 irpoatnreiv evl Xoyco vuv ypecov. r/ tl tl? dv, d 
 [w] Gea/r^re, ehroi kccXXlov ; 
 
 0EAI. ' ApeXcopev tov bvoparo?' apKel yap koll 
 
 10TOVTO. 
 
 37E. Trjs tolvvv TrXrjKTiKrjs to p.ev VVKTepLVOV, ol/xai, 
 Trpos irvpos (f)co? ytyvop.evov vir avTcov tgjv 7repi ttjv 
 Orjpav 7rvpevTiKi)v pi-jOrjvaL avp(3e'^r/Kev. 
 
 0EAI. Udvv ye. 
 x 5 3*E. To Se ye pteOrfpepLvov, coy eyovT&v ev ciKpois 
 dyKLCTTpa Kai tcov TpioSovTcov, ttolv dyKLaTpevTLKOV. 
 
 0EAI. AeyeTcu yap ovv. e 
 
 SE. ToD TOLVVV dyKLCTTpeVTLKOV TYjS 7tXt]KTLKT]? TO 
 
 fiev avooOev eh to /car 0) yLyvopcevov 6\a to toIs TpLo- 
 20 SovaLV ovTco ptaXiaTa \prjcrOaL TpLodovTia tl?, oipai, 
 KeKXrjTaL. 
 
 0EAI. <£>acrl yovv TLves. 
 
 S?E. To de ye Xolttov Icttlv ev eTL p.6vov, a>$ threw, 
 eldos. 
 
 8. [4]] 3.1 
 
 12. Trpos 77V pos <pa>s yiyv6fievov\ 
 The nocturnal branch of the 
 art of striking fish, as it is pur- 
 sued by fire-light, has received 
 from those who practise it the 
 name of ' firing.' 
 
 I 6. nav ayKurTpevTiKou] Sc. ep- 
 prjOr) from prjOrjvai avpfteftrjKev. 
 
 dyKto-rpevTiKov] This notion 
 reappears in Legg. 7, 823 e 
 (a curious passage) : h cpiXoi, 
 
 eld' i>p.as pr]re t\s emdvp,ia pfjr 
 epcos rrjs 7re/H dukarrav Stjpas Trore 
 Xu/3oi, pr]8e aytuarpeias' prjS" oXeos 
 tt)s rcbf evvdpcov £a>oov, prjre iypr)- 
 yopocn pi']re ev8oV(Ti Kvprois (cf. 
 SUpr. b.) apybv 8rjpav dicnrovovpe- 
 
 vois. (Cf. Opp. Halieut. 3, et 
 sqq. : Kvprois, 01 Kvao-aovras eovs 
 r)v(ppr]vav avaKTas.} 
 
 2 0. oiirco] Qc.avcoOev els to kcltw. 
 
 Xpr)0-6ai~\ Sc. tovs nepl ttjv re^- 
 vr]v. Cf. Gorg. 457 C, hvvavrai. 
 
p. 220. GEAI. To irolov ; 
 
 aE. To tt}s tvavTias TavTy 7rXr)yr]?, uyKicrTpcp re 
 521. yiyvopevov kcu tcov lyOvcav ov)( ?) tis av Tvyr) rou o~go- 
 /xaros 1 , cocnrep tols Tpiodovaiv, aXXa irep\ Tiqv K((pdXrjV 
 kou to o~TQ\±a rod OrjpevOevTOs eKaarore, koll KarcoOev 
 eh TOwavTiov avco pa(38oL$ kcu kclXcc/jlois uvacrTrco- 
 fxevov' ov 11 (frrjcrofiev, co Gecu'r^re, Sew Tovvopa 
 Xeyeadai ; 
 
 GEAI. Aokco fxev, oirep dpri 7rpov0€/xe0a Sew 
 e^evpelv, tovt clvto vvv chroTereXeaOaL. 
 
 aE. Nw apa Tr)? acnraXievTLKrjS iripi o~v re Kciyco 
 
 b avvcop.oXoyr]Kapev ov fiovov tovvo/jlo,, dXXa koll top 
 
 Xoyov Trep\ clvto Tovpyov elXrjtyapLtv 'iKavm. £vpma- 
 
 o~r]9 yap T€)(i>r)? to fiev rjpicrv Liepos ktt]tlkov rjv, 
 
 KT7JTLKOV Se ^ipcOTlKOV, )(eipCOTLKOV Se OrjpEVTLKOV, TOV 
 
 2G<M2TH2. 
 
 23 
 
 Tliis last 
 
 distinction 
 
 completes 
 
 the .Mini 
 fcion of the 
 
 -Art Of 
 
 angling." 
 
 Of which 
 we now 
 possess in 
 common, 
 not the 
 name alone, 
 but an 
 exact con- 
 J 5 ception ex- 
 pressed in 
 words. 
 
 3. fi tis av Tvxn] " Wherever 
 one may chance to hit." rv-y- 
 xdva is here in transition from 
 the literal to the metaphorical 
 meaning (from "hit" to 
 " chance"). 
 
 4. coo-rrep rdls Tpiohov(nv\ Sc. 
 yiyverai rj TrXrjyrj. 
 
 6. avawTTcoiievov] This neuter 
 participle, like yiyvopevov, is pas- 
 sive, the cognate accusative of 
 the active becoming the sub- 
 ject of the passive verb. See 
 General Introduction. " The 
 kind which is characterized by 
 the stroke opposite to this, 
 made with a barbed point not 
 in any chance part of the body 
 as is done with spears, but 
 about the head and mouth of 
 the prey, and in the opposite 
 direction, being effected with 
 an upward jerking movement 
 by means of rods and canes." 
 
 9. Strep — egevpeiv] " The dis- 
 covery of which we set before 
 US as a task." Cf. t'i ovv npoTa- 
 gofxeOa supra, and, for the pleo- 
 nasm of Sell/, Rep. 6, 503 c : 
 
 fjv yap 8irfk6opev <fiv(Tiv 8elv vtt- 
 apxeiv avro'is. lb. 7 5 535 a : 
 8e7v exXeKTeov. Phil. 5° d. 
 
 I 2. tov \6yov TvepX avro Tovpyov] 
 
 " The definition embracing 
 closely the thing itself," vid. 
 supr. 218 c. Cf. also Legg. 
 10, 895 d (already quoted) : 
 
 irepl eKacrrov Tpla voelv — ev p,ev 
 ttjv ovaiav, ev 8e rfjs ovo-las tov 
 \6yov, ev 8e to ovop.a, with which 
 
 compare Ep. 7, 342. 
 
 13. el\rj(pap.ev] The expression 
 is amplified in the second clause 
 and a new verb introduced, as 
 often in Plato. 
 
 14. to pev rjpio~v pepos] " The 
 
 one half" — the othei - , 7roi7]TtKrj, 
 is passed over here. 
 
24 
 
 I1AATQN02 
 
 8e Oi]p€VTiKou tcouOypiKoi', tcooOiipiKOv Se IvvypoQi)- p 
 ptKov, u>vypoO)]piKov Se tI) KarcoOeu rprjpa o\ov 
 aXievTiKov, aAievriKrjs de ttXiiktikov, 7rAi]KTiKr]? 8e 
 
 (tyKKTTptVTLKOV' TOVTOV $6 TO 7T€pl TY)V KOLTCx>6eV (ll>(jd 
 
 5 irXtiy^v uva(J7ru>p.evriv, air avrri? rrj<> TTpaijecos d(f)o- c 
 pLotcoOeu rovvopa, i) vvv aaTruXtevTiK^ (jfTrjOeura Itt'l- 
 k\i~\v yeyovev. 
 
 0EAI. Ylavrawacri pev ovv tovto ye lkolvco? 8e8r']- 
 Xootcli. 
 
 2. to Ktircodev] Cf. infr. 266 a. 
 
 4. to 7rep\ tt)v] " The class 
 which comprised." Cf. supr. 
 tov \6yov nepl civto Tovpyov. 
 
 5. an ai/Trjs Trjs Ttpu^ecos d(po- 
 
 poiuidev Tovvopa] I.e. it is pro- 
 posed to derive danraXuvs from 
 dvao-nda. See also Tim. Lex. 
 
 52 : do-7raXLevs, d\i(vs, dno tov 
 dvucmqv tijv aypav. HesycllillS 
 
 has preserved the real deriva- 
 tion from ao-TTakos, an Athama- 
 
 Tt X vr) 
 
 {irOirjTlKl]) 1 KTTjTLKT] 
 
 (p.eTalB\r]TLKr]) — L. — ^eipcoTiKT] 
 
 (dyeovio-TiKr)) — I^OrjpevTiKi] 
 {6i]pn tcov dyj/v)((bv) — ' — ^coodTjpLKrj 
 
 (rre^odrjpiKT]) — ' — evvypodrjptKi) 
 
 (opvidevTiicfi) — I — dXievTiKi] 
 
 (epKodrjpiKrj'j — ' — tt\i]kti.ki] 
 
 (jTVpeVTlKT]) 1 dyKtO~Tp€VTlKr) 
 
 nian word for 'fish.' (Passow 
 Lexic. s. v.) 
 
 6. 17 vvv do-TvuXitVTiKrj £r)TT)- 
 6e'io-a\ T. e. da7Ta\i(VTiKr], 77 vvv 
 
 (i)T7]6eio-a. Cf. infr. 231 b : iv 
 
 T(p vvv Xo'yw Trapa(pav€VTi. Note 
 
 the apposition of neuter and 
 fern. : to irepl — 17 k.t.A., and of 
 the name with the thing : t<.v- 
 
 vopa with 1) dcmaXievTLKi]. TliC 
 
 following is a summary of the 
 ahove divisions : 
 
 8. TiavTairao-i pev ovv tovto ye 
 
 cKavcbs deSfoaiTai] The method 
 of dichotomies has proved ade- 
 quate for the definition of an 
 art so simple and familiar as 
 that of the angler. The notion 
 of the Sophist, however, is more 
 complex, and after several par- 
 tial attempts, the definition of 
 him is found to be impracti- 
 cable, until we lay aside this 
 
 (rpiodovria) — ' — do-Tra\.ievTiKi']. 
 method for a time and review 
 some of our fundamental ideas. 
 It is difficult to say how far 
 the first or tentative part of 
 the inquiry is seriously intended 
 by Plato as an illustration or 
 application of method. There 
 is a tinge of satirical humour 
 obvious in almost every line. 
 This was the motive for the 
 choice of the angler as an ex- 
 
20<1>I2TH2. 
 
 2.5 
 
 p. 221. SE. <l>€p€ 8/], Kara tovto to Trapuhtiypa koll tov 
 o-o(j)iarrji> iTriyeip&pev evpeiv, o tl ttot ecrTiv ; 
 0EAI. l^o/ntSfj fieu ovv. 
 iftE. Kai /x?;^ €«€iv6 y rjv to (rjTrjpa TrpcoTOv, 
 
 TTOTtpOV l8lC0T1fV 7] TLVOL Tt\Vr]V tyOVTOL 0€T€OV ell/at 5 
 
 tov acnraXievT-qv. 
 
 0EAI. Nat. 
 
 HE. Kou zw <5r; tovtov ISicoTyv Orjaofitv, co Qeai- 
 d r?;re, ?} 7ravTa.7ra.0-Lv cos aXrjdcos o~o(pio~Tr)V ; 
 
 0EAI. OvSapLCos IduorrjV pavOavco yap o Aey«9,co? 10 
 *7ra^roy* <5et toiovtos elvai to ye bvo/ia tovto e^oov. 
 
 2E. 'AAAa rti/a Te^vrjv amov rjpuv ZyovTa, cos 
 eoiKe. OtTeov. 
 
 
 Foil. 
 
 this ( 
 pie Li t as 
 endeavour 
 
 to find til*: 
 
 nature of 
 the Sophist 
 
 also. 
 
 Is he an 
 artist, as 
 
 the fisher- 
 man was ? 
 His name 
 declares 
 him to he, 
 par excel- 
 lence, an 
 artist. 
 
 ample, this prompts the in- 
 clusion of war and tyranny, 
 pleading and arguing, under 
 SijpevTiKr], and that of poetry 
 and learning amongst the mer- 
 chant's wares, and the defini- 
 tion of higgling in the market 
 as au inartistic kind of con- 
 troversy. A deeper irony un- 
 derlies the admission of the 
 Sophist's claim to be considered 
 as a purifier of the soul. Yet 
 inseparably bound up with this 
 tone of sarcasm there is the 
 scientific spirit, which seeks for 
 general truths and disregards 
 common opinion. The defini- 
 tion of the tyrant or the war- 
 rior as a hunter of men falls 
 in with Plato's satiric fancy, 
 but has also an element of 
 scientific truth, and belongs 
 to the effort to connect things 
 apparently diverse under one 
 idea. This mixture of satire 
 and inquiry finds characteristic 
 expression in infr. 227 b : 
 tov KTTjo-aadai yap f-'vexa vovv 
 
 irao-av Texvmv to £vyyeves Kai to 
 flrj gvyyei'es KaTavoelv neipcopevr] (17 
 twv \6ya>v Texyrf) Tipa npos tovto 
 e'£ to-ou Trao-as — aepivoTepov 8e n 
 tov 81a o-TpaTTjyiKTJs *] epdeipiaTiKTjs 
 drj'XovvTa 8r]pevTiKr)v ov8ev vevo- 
 p.LKev, dXX as to rro\v yavvoTepov . 
 
 8. Kai vvv 8r/] "So now also." 
 Ka\ to be taken closely with vvv. 
 
 9. as akrjQms o-o<plCTTT]v] The 
 
 word here approaches the an- 
 cient meaning of " contriver," 
 " clever one," " skilled prac- 
 titioner." 
 
 II. *TravT6s* del] The MSS. 
 vary between navras and ov 
 navTas, the latter of which has 
 grown out of the former. A 
 further corruption (n) is toiov- 
 tov — tov — exovTa. The correc- 
 tion is due to the Zurich edi- 
 tors. For 7tovt6s Set, cf. Aesch. 
 
 Prom. 961 : noXXov ye Ka\ tov 
 navTos e'XAei7rco. ib. IO08 : tov 
 TravTos Se'w. 
 
 to ye ovofia tovto f\cov] " Since 
 
 he bears this name." Cf. Polit. 
 260 C : 8ean6(ovTd ye. 
 
26 I1AATQN02 
 
 0EAI. TtW TTOT OVV d)) TUVTljV ; ]). 22 
 
 Buthia 3lE. ' Ap co 7rpo? Oetov vyvorjKUpev TuvSpos tov 
 
 relation t* 
 
 the angler dvdpa ovTa £vyyevr) ; 
 
 does not r , ' 
 
 end here. 0EAI. TtW TOO ; 
 
 5 HE. Tov dairakitvTriv tov cro(fjtaTOu. 
 0EAI. IIjj; 
 
 They are HE. Ql]p6VT(X TLV€ KaTCL(f)aiV€Cr0OV a/JL(f)C0 fJLOL. e 
 
 0EAI. Tlvos di]pas arepos; tov ptev yap erepov 
 
 both sport: 
 men : and 
 each pur- 
 sues a cer- €L7T0fX€V 
 tain livi 
 
 yevovs. 12, 954 d : eKT-qpevos, o Oe 
 10. vxiv 8iei\opev] Cf. Thepet. fr)T<ov, alib. Pliileb. 56 d : oXXtjv, 
 159 c, vvv diTjXOofJLtv, where ttjv 8e aXKrjv ; Polit. 291 e: 
 there is the same variation of rvpawlbi, to 8e fiao-tXiKJj. Phsed. 
 MSS. ; some inserting 817, which 105 e. Bodl. and A ire^ov. 
 on account of 81 succeeding 2 i/Enrpeneo-Oov]" Their paths 
 may very possibly have dropped diverge when they have reach- 
 out, ed the art of animal-hunting, 
 vtva-TiKov pepovs, to oe ire£oi>] the one turning to the sea- 
 For the omission of to pev, which shore and to rivers and lakes, 
 is present in some MSS., com- to angle for the creatures that 
 pare Soph. Trach. 117 : rpeqba, are therein." 
 
 HE. At^a 7rov vvv 8iel\op.ev tt]v dypav Trdcrav, V6V- 
 
 CTTLKOV pt€pOV9, TO 8e 7T€(^OV T€pVOVT€9. 
 
 0EAI. Nat. 
 
 HE. Kal to pev SirjXOopev, oaov irepl to. vevorTiKa 
 tcov ivvSpcov to Se ire^ov eldaapev dcryio-TOv. elirov- 
 15 re? otl iToXvubes e'lrj. 
 
 0EAI. Haw ye. p. 222. 
 
 HE. Me'x/)* ptev tolvvv IvTavQa 6 ao(picrTr)s re /cat 
 o aaiTaXtevTrjs a/xa goto tt]? kt7]TIKt]? Teyyrj^ iropev- 
 ecr&ov. 
 
 -° 0EAI. 'FtOlKGLTOV yOVV. 
 
 From this £?E. ^KTpeireaOov Se ye goto 7-77? ^tooOrjpLKrj^, 6 
 
 2. rdubpos tov avdpa] Cf. to S' ai/|ei. Eurip. Hippolyt. 
 
 Kep. 5, 455 d: to yevos tov 233, 4. Theset. 181 d. 
 
20M2TH2. 
 
 27 
 
 p. 222. p-tv eVrt OaXarrav irov koll 7rorap.ov? koll XipLvas, rav 
 T0VT0L9 £coa OrjpevaopLtvos. 
 
 GEAI. Tifirjv; 
 
 SE. O <5e ye etn rrjv yrjv koll Trorapovs erepovs 
 av tlvols, ttXovtov koll veoTrjTO? oiov Xei/mcovas a(j)66- 5 
 vovf, rav tovtols OpepLpcara xeLpwaopLevos. 
 b 0EAI. Um Xeyeis ; 
 
 HE. Tr/s ire^rjs &r)pa$ yiyveaOov Svo p-eylarco 
 rive fJteprj. 
 
 0EAI. Yiolov eKccrepov ; ic 
 
 path di 
 1 1 rge. The 
 
 Ml"!' | 
 
 i flu 
 rivers, 
 lakes, and 
 teeming 
 seas. The 
 Sophist 
 turns him 
 to the land: 
 or if to 
 rivers they 
 are the 
 rivers of 
 wealth, 
 which 
 nourish 
 bounteous 
 
 i. 7rov gives the touch of 
 conscious iudefiniteness in 
 which the preciseness of the 
 Greek language delights. 
 
 4. 'O 8e ye errl ttjv yrjv — ] 
 
 " To very different rivers of 
 wealth, and rich meadow-lands 
 of generous youth." Lit. " to 
 rivers of wealth, a different 
 sort of rivers." This punctu- 
 ation avoids the confusion of 
 the two metaphors (river and 
 meadow) and preserves the 
 appropriateness of each. For 
 the former, cf. iEsch. Prom. 
 
 805 : 01 XP v(J °PP VTOV oIkov<tiv 
 ap(fn vafxa UXovrcovoi nopov, 
 
 where the notion of abundance 
 is. associated with the image of 
 golden sands ; and for the 
 latter, Soph. Trach. 143 : to 
 yap vea^ov iv roioicrSe jSofr/cerat 
 -^oapoLcnv avrov. 
 
 For the metaphorical use of 
 the word irorapos to denote 
 abundance, cf. also Tim. 43 a : 
 
 ai 8e els ttotq/jlov eVSe^eTcrcu 7ro- 
 
 Xvv — viz. the flux of corporeal 
 particles in the body. The 
 word \eip.a>vas is naturally sug- 
 gested by the notion of a fer- 
 tilizing river with green banks, 
 
 and perhaps partly by a false 
 echo from Xip,vas preceding. 
 
 8. Tr)s Tre^s 6i)pas k.t.X.] The 
 description of 8i)pevriK^ in Legg. 
 7, 823 b should be compared, 
 line by line, with this passage : 
 
 6r\pa yap TtapnoXv tl irpdypa. eo-n, 
 TrepieiXr]p.p,evov ovopari vvv o~xe86v 
 ivi. 7rok\rj p.ev yap i) ra>v ivv8pa>v, 
 tvoXXtj 8e rj rav Trrr]vu>v, irapnoXv 
 8e Kal to tvepX to. 7re£a drjpevpara, 
 ov povov drjplcov, aXXa Ka\ ttju rav 
 dvdpamcDV ai^iov ivvoelv 8i)pav, ttjv 
 re Kara ir6Xepov : tyoXXtj 8e /cat 77 
 Kara (piXiav Orjpevovaa, rj p.eu enat- 
 vov, T] 8e xj/oyov e\ei' Kal KXaTrelat,, 
 Ka\ Xy]o~Ta>v /ecu o~TpaTOTre8av arpa- 
 TOTre8ois Brjpai. 
 
 yiyveo-6ov\ Bodl. Vat. Ven. 
 n. yLyveo-Qa, which might be 
 defended from emap.ev follow- 
 ing. But the word is explana- 
 tory of exxpeireo-Qov in what 
 precedes, and the v is more 
 likely to have been dropped 
 than to have been inserted 
 wrongly, especially considering 
 
 the SpoioTfXevrov of peyiara). 
 
 The 61'ipa tcov ijpepcov is termed 
 
 peyLCTTOV as including o-Tpari]yui, 
 XrjariKr), 8iKaviKrj, epcoTlKrj, koXu- 
 
 KlKl], CTOCpllTTlKl]. 
 
 E 2 
 
IS 
 
 IIAATI2N02. 
 
 pastures i 
 generous 
 youth. 
 
 Now land 
 
 animals arc 
 tame and 
 wild ; and, 
 if man is a 
 tame crea- 
 ture, tame 
 creatures 
 also ran 
 be made 
 a prey. 
 
 HE. To pev riiiv rjptpoyv, to 8e tcov dypicov. 
 
 BEAI. Etr €(.ttl tl? 6i)pa tcov ypc-'pcov ; 
 
 HE. Ei' irlp ye iorTiv av6pa>iro<s ijpepov (a>ov. 0e? 
 8e ottyj xalpcL?, e'/re p.r)8ev TiOeis ijpepov, e'/re aAAo 
 5 p.ev i]p.epov ti, tov he avOpcoirov aypiov, etre rjpepov 
 pcev Aeyei? av tov avOpioirov, avOptoiTtov 8e prjdeplav 
 rjyel 6r\pav. tovtcov '\ biroTep^ av r]yel (j)i\ov elprjoQai 
 aoi, tovto iip.lv Stopiaov. 
 
 p. 222. 
 
 2. eira expresses surprise. 
 Cf. The^et. 207 d. 
 
 3. El' trip ye eariv dvd, rjp. £.] 
 
 This is not always fully ad- 
 mitted. See Theset. 174 d: 
 
 Bvo-KoXwrepov 8e eKelvasv ££>ov Kai 
 e-m^ovXoTepov noipaiveiv re Kai 
 (38dXXeiv vupi^ei avrovs. Legg. 6, 
 766 a '. "AvBpumos 6Y, wt (papev, 
 ijpepov, opcos prjv naiSelas pev 
 opdrjs tv\ov Kai (pvaecos eirvxovs 
 6eioTdTOV rjpepaiTaTov re ££)ov yiy- 
 vecrBat (piXel, pr) Ikciucos 8e r) pr) 
 Ka\£>s rpacfrev aypiioTciTov onocra 
 
 (pvei yr\. Cf. Xen. Cyr. I. 1, § 2 : 
 
 Tracras roivvv tcis ayeXas ravras 
 ebonovpev opav paXXov edeXovo-ai 
 Tveldeadai rots vopevo~iv r) tovs 
 avBpconovs rois apxovai. For 
 Ti6e\s — Xeyeis, cf. Supr. 221 d, 
 
 and note. 
 
 7. foTrorep'T av rjyel (piXov el- 
 prja-Oal aoi] The plural onoTepa, 
 
 with 4>iXov and tovto following, 
 is difficult ; and the word im- 
 plies two, whereas there are 
 three if not four alternatives. 
 Badham's conjecture, o ti irep 
 &v (cf. infr. 255 a, Legg. 1, 645 
 c), is probably right, rjyel is the 
 Bodleian reading ; av is to be 
 taken with elpija-dai (ptXov o-ot : 
 " Whichever of these alterna- 
 tives you think will please 
 you when spoken." Com- 
 
 pare infr. 223 b: TO 7TpOO-?)KOV 
 
 ovop av rjyovpat KaXelv avrov. 
 
 There is no objection to the 
 repetition of the same word 
 r]yel in a somewhat different 
 connexion ; cf. Theset. 148 b : 
 ovk av Surcupyrji' — wa-rrep trepl — 
 ttjs Wdjiews. alib. 
 
 8. tovto rjplv Siopiaov] The 
 Bodleian and the cognate MSS. 
 (including Flor. i.) have biopi- 
 o-reov. This could only mean, 
 " Whichever of these alterna- 
 tives you think will please you, 
 this we must decide upon." 
 But this reading, though not 
 altogether absurd (cf. Polit, 
 
 261 e *. KaOarvep bianeXevus 
 
 iroirjreov), may probably be 
 classed amongst those which, 
 although occurring in the best 
 MSS., are traceable to the 
 wrong-headed ingenuity of the 
 scribes, like etjaio-101 o-otpol for 
 e|i}s ol crocpoi in Theset. 1 52 e 
 (Bodl.), aKpiftccv for aKpcov, ib. 
 148 c. (Bodl. A. n.) The impe- 
 rative is required by 6e$ pre- 
 ceding. For tovto rjplv diopiaov , 
 cf. Gorg. 488 d : tovto poi avTo 
 o~a(pa>s biopiaov, tovtov tj eTepov 
 eo~Ti to Kpelrrov Ka\ to fieXTLov 
 Kai to lo-\vp6Tepov. Rep. IO, 
 598 a : 'A pa ola eariv r) oia (pai- 
 verai ; tovto yap en 8iopiaov. 
 
20<M2TH2. 29 
 
 \%. 0EAI. 'AAA' rj/JLoi? re rjfMpov, co £eW, rjyovfiai 
 £(ooi>, drjpav re avOpwiraiv tivai Xe'yco. 
 
 3*E. AlTT7jV TOLVVV KOLl TTJL* rjfJL€po9^piKl)V ei7T0)/JL€l>. 
 
 0EAI. Kara ti XeyovTt? ; 
 
 AE. T?)^ /X6// Xr]0~TLK1]V KOLL aV^paTToBLCTTLKrjV K.OLI 5 This hap- 
 
 \ \ 5- / \ . /,\/ P enB either 
 
 TVpaVVlKTjV KOLl ^VpLTTaCTaV TY]V TToXepLLKyV, €V TTaVTa through 
 
 n / n / i / force or 
 
 piaiov Ur/pav opicra/jLevoi. through 
 
 0EAI. KaXm. pe,su " ion - 
 
 SE. Tt)v <5e' ye 8iK.avLKi]v roll Srj/j.i]yopiKr]i> kou 
 
 7TpO<TOfjll\T]TlK7Jl>, €V CLV TO ^VVoXoV IT iO av OV py LK1]V 10 
 
 d riva fiiav riyviqv irpoawirovTes. 
 6EAI. 'Op0m. 
 
 HE. T^9 &) 7ndaV0VpyiKrj? SlTTOC XiycopLeV yevr). And per- 
 
 suasion 
 may be 
 public o 
 private. 
 
 0EAI. YiyvecrOov yap ovv tido? eKarepov. 
 
 3*E. OvKOVV ai) TT]? i8lO0r]p€VTlKrjs TO /ueV pucrOap- Persuasion 
 
 / , v jv rs , , in private 
 
 VtVTLKOV eO~Tl, TO be OCOpoCpopLKOV ; sometimes 
 
 0EAI. Ou piavOaVGi. wards, and 
 
 H-cpi m ~ " > ' r\' '* * »/ sometimes 
 
 A ti. 1 27 tcov ep&vTcov urjpa. TOV VOW, 0)? toiKas, 20 on the 
 
 v / contrary 
 
 oi>7rtt> 7rpoaeo-yes. brings 
 
 /"vtt< at tt " suasion 
 
 BEAI. Ilcua; 
 
 ^TT' T^ * " '£•' v £ v £> ' ' public or 
 
 A hi. 1 o ^.tej/ eTepou iota., to be or/pLoaia yiyvop.tvov. Tr 
 
 gifts. 
 
 5. T?jv fih \j]o-TiKi'jv — ] Com- cler one heading, 
 
 pare Ar. Pol. I. 3 : Oi 8' anb 17. pia6apvevTiKoi> — ptaGapvev- 
 
 6i]pas C&>o-ii>, tca\ 6t)pa<; (repot tikov] I prefer giving the form 
 
 erepas, oluv oi pev airb A^oreta?, of the word which appears ill 
 
 01 $' acp' akielas — ol S' air opvl- all the MSS. (instead of pi- 
 
 6u>v r) Brjplaiv aypiav. Alb ko.\ r) crdapvrjTLK.), though suspected by 
 
 Tro'XepiKr] cpvo~ei kttjtikt] ttws ea-rar Heinclorf, whose dictum (Quod 
 
 rj yap 6-qpevTucr) pepos avTrjs, jj SeZ in Lexicis, auctore nullo, pro- 
 
 XPi)o~6ai Ttpos re ra Brjpici Kai rav fei'tur verbum ptcrdapveveiv, val- 
 
 dv6p6iTru)v 00-01 necpvKOTes apx^o-dai de vereor ne a sermonis ana- 
 
 prj 6e\ov<rtv. logia abhorreat) is open to 
 
 10. tt poao pikrjT lkt]v = the art question. Why not picrBapvevco 
 
 of intercourse. The word is from piaSapvos, as K.cmr]\fva> from 
 
 invented in order to include Kanr/'Kos 1 Still it may be cor- 
 
 love-making and sophistry un- rupted from ISiodijpeur. 
 
so 
 
 riAATQNOS 
 
 Lovers, for 
 instance, 
 lavish pre- 
 sents "ii 
 
 v. I 
 
 mi 
 
 they win. 
 
 Of mercen- 
 ary persua- 
 sion, one 
 1. ranch 
 allures 
 through 
 pleasure, 
 and, as for 
 hire, ex- 
 pects no 
 more than 
 to be fed. 
 This is 
 called 
 flattery. 
 Another 
 kind pro- 
 fesses to 
 impart 
 virtue, and 
 takes a 
 money fee. 
 What is 
 
 0EAI. Tovwepi; p. 
 
 HE. ' Qti roi9 drjpevOdcrt Scopa 7rpocre7rt8i8oao~ii>. 
 
 0EAI. ' AXydearara Xe'yet?. e 
 
 HE. Tovto pev tolvvv epcoTiKr/s T€)(W]9 earco elSos: . 
 5 0EAI. Udvv ye. 
 
 HE. Tou Se ye pucrOapvevTiKov to pev irpoao- 
 ptXovu Sid -)(apLTOs koll TravTanvaai Si rjSovrj? to 
 Se'Xeap ireironip.evov kou tov piaOov irpaTTopevov 
 Tpo(f)-qv eavTcp povov KoXa.KiKi]i>, coy eycopai, irdvTes p. 
 iofyalpev av rj8vi>TiKr)V Tiva Te^vrjv elvai. 
 
 0EAI. YIcos yap ov ; 
 
 HE. To Se eirayyeXXopevov pev coy apeTrjs eveim 
 Tag bpiiXias iroiovpievov, pnaOov Se vo pier pa irpaTTo- 
 pievov, dpa ov tovto to yevos eTepw Trpoo~emeiv d^iov 
 Hoi/opart,; 
 
 0EAI. Umydp ov ; 
 
 HE. Tivi 8r) tovtco ; rreipco Xeyeiv. 
 
 223. 
 
 2. 7rpo(T€7T-t^tSoao"ii'] The pre- 
 positions imply " in addition to 
 all the means employed to win 
 
 them." (npocreTi 8a>pa yp. 2.B.) 
 
 4. ipu>riKT)s Tex v is — eiSos] 
 Gen. of apposition. 
 
 6. Tou de ye piadapvevTiKOv 
 
 elvai] " But that sort of hireling 
 the object of whose commerce 
 is to gratify, and whose lure is 
 baited with any kind of plea- 
 sure, while the only hire which 
 lie exacts is sustenance for him- 
 self, I presume we should all 
 describe as the flatterer, who is 
 one of the sweeteners of life." 
 
 8. ■neTroirip.ivov ] pf. passive 
 
 with middle signification. 
 
 IO. TjSvvTiKip Tiva Tex vr } v ~\ " al1 
 
 art of sweetening." These words 
 express the function of koKcikikt] 
 more precisely. There is no 
 
 need of inserting fj before ^w. 
 with Heindorf and some later 
 editors. Cf. Theast. 175 e : p-q- 
 
 8e 6\f/6v rj8vvai t] 6a>na<; Xoyovs, 
 
 where cookery and flattery 
 seem to be included under 
 rjSvvTiKT] ; and Gorg. 462-465, 
 where however KuXaKela is the 
 general word, including o^o- 
 noua, prjTopLKTj, and the rest. 
 Other instances occur (e. g. 
 p.eTa$\r}TiKTi supr. compared with 
 infr. 224 c) in which the same 
 word has alternately a general 
 and specific meaning. 
 
 12. To Se — ovopan] " But an- 
 other sort, professing to make 
 virtue the end of his inter- 
 course, while exacting his hire 
 in the shape of coin, — is it not 
 worth while to address this 
 kind by a different name?" 
 
20M2TH2. 
 
 31 
 
 p. 223. 0EAI. ArjXov 8i]' tov yap ao({)io-T)jv poi Sokou- 
 pcev avevprjKevou. tout ovv eycoye elircov to irpoo~i)K.ov 
 ovopi av rjyovpcai KoKtlv avTOv. 
 b HE. Kara Srj tov vvv, co Qec/.LTrjTe, Xoyov, cos* 
 
 4. Kara 8rj — 8r)pn] The obser- 
 vation of Schleiermacher, that 
 thei'e are several redundant 
 words in this passage, was mis- 
 applied by Heindorf and Stall- 
 baumwhen they rejected picrdap- 
 
 VLKrjs as Well as KrrjTiKrjs, ne(o8r]- 
 
 pias, and r'lpepodrjpiKijs. For the 
 science which takes rewards 
 includes the flatterer with the 
 Sophist, who stands alone how- 
 ever in taking his reward in 
 money. The word ireCodrjpLas 
 can hardly be retaiued, x e P- 
 aaias being evidently substi- 
 tuted for this with reference to 
 
 Slipr. 222 a: 6 be ye eir\ ri)v yrjv. 
 The Case of r)pepo8rjpiKr)S is 
 
 somewhat different. For there 
 might be other tame creatures 
 besides man which became the 
 objects of the chase (e.g. pheas- 
 ants and deer in modern 
 times); compare Polit. 262 b. 
 The MSS., however, vary as to 
 the form of the word. 
 
 xetpodTiKris, which the edi- 
 tors retain after oliteiaiTiKrjv, 
 has very slight authority (Ven. 
 
 2. Aid. Bas. 1, 2. St.) The 
 word is not indispensable ; 
 for oucetomfo/s might be fairly 
 substituted (according to the 
 spirit of the present passage) 
 for xeipojrtK^s, as a softer word 
 — " Convey the wise it call." 
 We may therefore either read 
 
 KTr}TiKi)s, OLKeia>TiKrjs, 01' omit 
 XeipaTiKijs and KTTjTiKrj^, taking 
 otKeLooTiKrjs as a substitute for 
 both. The Stranger is not 
 always quite exact in reca- 
 pitulating. Thus, infr. 224 d, 
 peTa(3\r]TiKri is substituted for 
 aWciKTiKr], and the peTa(H\t]TtKr) of 
 the previous argument is omit- 
 ted. Hence it is unnecessary, 
 with Heindorf and Stallbaum, 
 to supply the missing link tti- 
 davodiipiasinike present passage. 
 Cf. Polit. 261 e, where such va- 
 riation of terms is justified. 
 
 nefodripias, if genuine, distin- 
 guishes Tre£a from TTrrjva, x e P~ 
 crains, 7re£a from evvbpd, but X- 
 
 should then come first. 
 
 The divisions have been as 
 follows : 
 
 Texvr) 
 
 TTOir]TlKr]-^—KT^TLKr) 
 peTaffk-qTlKTj 1 \eip(£>TlKT] 
 
 dyaviCTTiKr] ' 8r]pevriKT} 
 
 twv d^vx^v 1 £ao6r)piKr] 
 
 ire£o8rjpiKi) ' ivvypoBrjpiKr) 
 
 OpVldeVTLKT] ' aKieVTLKT] 
 
 i8>]ptKrj--l 7r\rjKTiKr) 
 
 (3iaios Br)pa *— — TridavovpyiKi] TrvpevriKi] — ' — dyKiarTpeVTiKrj 
 
 i] bijpoala yiyvopevr] — >■ — IbiodrjpevriKii rpinbovria — ' — danciKievTiKr) 
 
 tuv dypicov-i—f]pepo8r]pLKr] epi< 
 
 called ' 
 
 t<» have 
 found the 
 Sophist. 
 
 8a>po(popiKr r 
 
 — I picrdapvevTiKi] 
 
 KoXaKlKrj 1 acXpKTTlKrj. 
 
32 
 
 IIAATUNOI' 
 
 Still let us 
 look at this 
 many-sided 
 creature in 
 .another 
 aspect. 
 For the 
 divisions 
 we have 
 made afford 
 an opening 
 for defining 
 him in a 
 different 
 way. One 
 
 eoiKev, ■>'] T€)(i/r)S oii<(ta)TiK))<>, -|/cr/;nK?;9 f", drjpevrucfjs, p 
 (fix)0)]pia<?, "fwe^odrjpiwf, \eporaia9, "f'qfjjEpodjjpucrjsf, 
 
 av0p(oiTo6r)pLa$, i8io0r/pia?, ixia6apvLKr)<>\ vopuapaTO- 
 7tco\ik)]9, 8o^o7rat8evriK7]9, vecov irXovcrLwv kou iv 
 5 Sofjcov yiyvoplvr) drjpa 7rpoapi]Teov, a)? 6 vvv Aoyoy 
 i]puv avpfialvei, aofpiartKr). 
 0EAI. YlavTairacn pev ovv. 
 
 HE. 'En oe /ecu Tjjde ?8(opev ov yap tl (f)av\r}? 
 peToypv earn reyyrjs to vvv (rjTovpevov, aAA' ev p.aka c 
 io7roiKi\r]?. Kal yap ovv ev toIs irpoaOev elprjpevois 
 (j)avracrp.a irape^eTai, p.i] tovto o vvv avro rjp.ei9 
 (pape'v, aAA' erepov elval tl yevos. 
 0EAI. Uy 8y ; 
 
 HE. To Trj? KTrjTLKrjs Te^v^s 8ltt\ovv rjv ei86s 
 ' 5 ttov, to p.ev O-qpevTLKOV p.epos eypv, to 8e aXXaKTLKOV. 
 
 23. 
 
 4. §ogo7rai.§evTiKTjs] This refers 
 to Slipr. a : inayyeKkopcvov — 
 noiovpevov. 
 
 kol ev86§av] Cf. Protag. 
 316 b, where Socrates recom- 
 mends Hippocrates to the con- 
 sideration of Protagoras : 'ln- 
 
 TTOKpaTrjs o8e ecrrl pev ra>v eVi^co- 
 pia>v, 'A7roXAoScopov vios, oiKias 
 peydXrjs re Kai cv8a.ifj.ovos' avros 
 be Trjv (pvaiv 8oKel evdpiXXos eivai 
 to'is rjXiKiwrais. imdvpelv 8e poi 80- 
 Kel eWoyipos yevecrdai iv rfj Trohei. 
 
 The use of pe'roxdv io-n for 
 fitrexei, like that of the par- 
 ticiple and auxiliary verb 
 noticed above, is in the style 
 of these dialogues. Cf. also 
 Phaedr. 262 d. 
 
 7. ovv] "In accoi'dance with 
 this remark," i. e. consistently 
 with the creature's manifold 
 cunning. 
 
 8. Tfj8( 'tioopiv] Eodl. FA An 
 
 eldcofiev. This might be de- 
 fended from Theset. 202 e : 
 'la-riov 81). But the text pre- 
 sents a more lively image, and 
 is in better accoi'dance with 
 Plato's usual manner. This 
 corruption is frequent. 
 
 1 1 . qbdvT .TTapex-]" tie (aur6,the 
 subject of our inquiry) holds 
 forth the appearance ; leads us 
 to imagine." No English word 
 exactly corresponds to <pdv- 
 Tacrpa here, which retains the 
 verbal notion : the German 
 Schein is perhaps nearly equi- 
 valent. Cf. Theast. 199 c : 8a- 
 
 voTfpov pevrot Ttddos 0AX0 napa- 
 
 (fialveo-dai poi 8oKei, As we re- 
 view the previous argument, 
 the Sophist shews his face to 
 us on the other side of our 
 division-line. 
 
 1,5- to pev drjpevriKov] Here 
 again the recapitulation is not 
 
20<M2TH2. 
 
 3, 0EAI. 'H^ ydp ovv. 
 
 aK. T/;? to'lvvv uWaKTucr}? 8vo e\8r) Ae- 
 yu>p.ev, to p.ev boop^TtKov, to Se tTipov dyopa- 
 
 CTTLKOV J 
 
 0EAI. Eip7]O-0CO. 
 
 HE. Kai iatjv av (fyyaopeu dyopaaTLKi]v Stxfl T€fi- 
 veaOai. 
 d GEAI. IL7; 
 
 HE. Tr)v peu twv avTOvpycov avTOTrcoXiKrjv Siai- 
 povpevr)v, tt)v be toc aWoTpia eypa pL€Tafia\Xopevr)v 
 p.eTafi\r)TLKr)v. 
 
 GEAI. Udvv ye. 
 
 HE. Ti Se ; rrjs fjL€T<x(3kr]TiKr)9 ov\ r\ pkv Kara 
 ttoXlv dWayrj, a^eSou avTrjs ijpiav pepos 6i>, Ka.7n]- 
 Xlktj Ti'poo-ayopeveTai ; 
 
 GEAI. Nat. 
 
 kind ol ac 
 quisition 
 we found 
 bo be ex- 
 change. 
 Property ia 
 exchanged 
 l>y gift and 
 5 by sale. 
 
 The seller 
 is either a 
 io manufac- 
 turer or a 
 merchant. 
 
 The mer- 
 chant 
 either re- 
 tails or 
 15 exports. 
 
 quite exact : kttjtikt) was divided 
 
 into perafShrjTiKov ( = dWaKTiKov) 
 and x (l P COTlK ° 1 'i an d x fl P a>TlK0V 
 into dycoviariKov and drjpevriKov. 
 
 Supr. 219. 
 
 3. to pev baprjTiKov] These 
 words are suggested by 8a>po- 
 (poptKov in the previous argu- 
 ment ; the new discussion, as 
 so often in Plato, taking colour 
 from that which precedes. But 
 cf. also supr. 219 d : /j.eTo/3X^n- 
 
 kov ou did re Scopecov kul dyopdo-ecov. 
 9. TrjV pev 8iaipavpevr}v\ 
 
 " Those who make what they 
 sell being distinguished as 
 ' producers.' " 
 
 tS>v avrovpySiv] Those who 
 manufacture what they sell. 
 The word is used etymologi- 
 cally. The usual meaning is, 
 ' one who farms his own land.' 
 
 Cf. 
 
 >\ Rep. 8, 565 a : tr/pos 
 
 — ocroi avrovpyoi re kcii anpaypo- 
 ves, ov ivdvv 7roAXa KeKTrjptvoi. 
 
 9. diaipnvpevrjv (passive) an- 
 swers better to the question jt/J 
 
 ((pr)0-0fj,ev TepveaBai) than b~iai- 
 
 povpevoi, which is read only in 
 two MSS. of inferior note, and 
 appears in two others (n B) as 
 a correction. 
 
 11. peT(i(3\r]TiKr)v] This name 
 was previously given to the 
 whole class which is now called 
 
 dWaKTIKT]. 
 
 13. rfj? pfral3\T}TiKTJs K.r.A.] 
 Cf. Ar. Pol. I. 4 : rr/s 8e pera- 
 f3\T]TiK.rjs peyiarrov pev ip-rropia. 
 
 1 4. o-^eSov — fjpto-v] And there- 
 fore fit to form our next divi- 
 sion. 
 
 Ka'mj'kiKTj] The notion of retail 
 business in Rep. 37 ib,c, iv avr% 
 rfj ttoKci k. t. X. is more exact 
 than here. Bodl. p.m. : tcdi n^Xi^. 
 
34 
 
 TIAATQN02 
 
 Now the 
 
 export 
 
 trader 
 
 deals in 
 food for 
 
 the body 
 or in food 
 for the 
 mind. 
 
 HE. To 6V ye e£ aAA?;y eh akXi-jV irokiv 8iaA\ar- p. 229 
 Topcevov (bvf) kcil Trpdaei epLiropiKi] ; 
 
 GEAI. Ti 8 ov; 
 
 2;E. Trj? 6° e/jLTTOpLKrj? up ovk fiaOijpeOa otl to 
 '< fie'v, ocroi? to crtopa r pefeTai "j"j" Kexprjrat, to 8e, e 
 ocroiy 77 'i'VXHi 7rcoAovv 8id vop.iorp.aTos aAAarrerai ; 
 
 GEAI. rTcos* toDto Ae'yei? ; 
 
 SE. To 7repi 7-7)1/ tyvxqv ureas dyvoovp.ev, «T€« to 
 ye ercpov irov ^vviep.ev. 
 » GEAI. No/. 
 
 SE. Movo"i/O7i> re toLvvv ^vvdiraaav XeycopLeu, eVc 
 
 I. SiaXXarrouei'Oi/] Prob. mid- 
 dle voice, as p.eTafiaX\6p.€Vov 
 supr., dWaTTerai infr. But per- 
 haps passive, like dvatnrafievov 
 and other words noticed above. 
 dia signifies 'transmission,' as 
 in Rep. i, 328 a : XapnaBia 
 i'\ovTes 8ia8a)<T0V(Tiv dXXrjXois j 
 
 5. Kexprjrai] Heindorf changed 
 this into ko.1 xp*I™ without 
 giving a reason. Stallbaum, 
 who objects to this change, 
 gives K.a\ Ke\pr}Tai, apparently 
 taking this to be the MS. read- 
 ing. Bekker : " <a\ XPV™ 
 Heindorfius : libri Kexptfrai. n 
 And so the Bodleian MS., viz. 
 
 rpfCperai Kexpi)Tai. For the 
 perfect, cf. Rep. 3, 409 c, Tim. 
 65 e. The objection to this 
 is that the seller cannot be 
 said to use that which he 
 sells. Stallbaum's reading is 
 preferable, if Ke'xp»?rat be ren- 
 dered " stands in need," sc. 
 avrav, for which meaning see 
 Legg. 4, 717 c. There is a 
 similar difficulty about the 
 reading of Euthyd. 289 a. 
 
 8. dyvooi>p.ev — ^vvUptuJ The 
 
 first pei-s. plur. is used with a 
 kind of playful condescension, 
 as in Theset. 210 b : rj ovv en 
 
 Kvovfiev Tt Kai o>8ivopev, w (£iXe, 
 fj Tvdvra eKreroKapev ; 
 
 II. Mov<tikt]v — irapaax^v] A 
 somewhat awkward sentence, 
 where, as in supr. 219 b, ndv 
 oirep k. t. X., the end does not 
 seem to have been clearly seen 
 from the beginning. The con- 
 struction is, however, clear. 
 " Speaking of all music, and 
 painting, and juggling, and 
 many other things which are 
 carried about and sold, some 
 for the delectation, and some 
 for the serious purposes of the 
 mind, let us say that when 
 bought in one place and carried 
 elsewhere to be sold, they give 
 to him who carries and sells 
 them, quite equally with the 
 sale of food and drink, a just 
 title to the name of merchant." 
 Besides the general irregularity 
 of the sentence, the concrete 
 fjLovaiKT] — a3VT)6(l(ra is made 
 parallel to the abstract a it lav 
 — npdais. For the use of napi- 
 
20<M2TH2. 
 
 35 
 
 p. 224. 7ro\ecos iKaarore ei? ttoXiv tvOev peu d)vr)Oeicrav y 
 CTepooae 8e dyo/xeprju koll 7ri7rpa<TKOfiei>r)v, Kai ypa(f)i- 
 ktjv Kai 0au/j.aTO7rouKr}u kou 7roAAa erepa rrj? ^X^r, 
 Ta fxev 7rapapvOla?, ra 8e Kai (T7rov8rjs X"-P ll> dyOtvra 
 Kai 7rQ)Aovfiei>a, tov ayovra Ka\ ircaXovvTa pr)8ev 5 
 tjttov rrj? tqjv aiTiwv Ka\ ttotwv Trpdo-ews epiropov 
 opdats dv Xeyopevov irapacr^lv . 
 
 0EAI. ' AXrjOeaTaTa Xeyeis. 
 b SE. Ovkovv Ka\ tov fiaOyfiara £vv(ovovfj.€VOV 
 irokiv re €K 7r6\€(09 vopla/JLaTOf dfulfiovTa ravrhv ic 
 Trpoo-epei? ovofjta ; 
 
 0EAI. ^(poSpaye. 
 
 SE. T^s* 8rj y\rv\epTropLKri9 ravrrjs dp ov to fiev 
 
 Xeiv, cf.Phaedr. 238 a: kcutovtcdv 
 t3>v l8eS)v ennpeTrrjs 17 av rvxfi yevo- 
 pevr/ TTjv avrrjs enavvpiav ovopa- 
 £6pevov tov e'xovTa Trapexerai. In 
 the mention of painting and 
 juggling there is probably a 
 tacit anticipation of pp. 234, 5, 
 where the art of the Sophist 
 is compared to both. For 
 the two genitives ifrvxns napa- 
 fiv6ias x<*p tv > cf. Rep. 7 > 5 2 5 c : 
 
 ovk 0)1/775 ov8e npacrecos X^P lv ™ s 
 ipiropovs f) Kairrjkovs pehercovTas, 
 d\\' avrrjs rrjs ^fvxrjs, pqo-Ta>vr]s 
 re p.eTao~Tpo<pT}s (sc. avTrjs) «r 
 d\r)deidv re Kai ovaiav. 
 
 9. padr/paTa f-vvav.] I. e. 
 
 Buying knowledge from all 
 quarters. 
 
 10. TToXlV €K TToXeWs] "And 
 
 exchanges them from one city 
 to another for money." The 
 former of the two prepositions 
 is dropped, as in iEsch. Prom. 
 682 : yrjv npb yrjs e'Xavvopai. 
 Compare Polit. 289 e : to. re 
 
 yetapyias <a\ ra to>v aWcov rexvaiv 
 
 fpya 8iaKop.l£ovT(s or d\\rp\ovs 
 
 F 
 
 Kai avio-ovvres, 01 pep Kar ayopas 
 ol 8e ttoKiv eK noKeas dWdrTovrts 
 Kara 6d\ao-<rav <a\ ireQ, vopio~pd 
 re Trpos raXXa Kai avro npos aiiro 
 SiapeiftovTes. Heindorf renders 
 in both passages, " exchanging 
 one city for another." But in 
 this case it. e. 77. vop. dp. could 
 only mean " being induced by 
 a money payment to change 
 their abode," which is plainly 
 not intended here. Hence 
 Stallbaum's objection to vopio-- 
 
 p.aros. In Apol. 37 d, aXKrjv 
 e£ a'AAr?? noXeas dpeil3opti>a>, it 
 
 is observable that the middle 
 voice is used ; cf., however, 
 Legg. 760 c. The meaning is 
 the same as supr. 223 e : e'£ 
 
 aXXrjs els aX\t]v 7ro\iv BiaXXaTTO- 
 pevov &vt] Ka\ Trpdaei. 224 a : 
 eV noXetos — els tto)uv — iwtpao-KO- 
 pivqv. For \eyu>pev, cf. Theset. 
 159 a: \eywpev df] epe re Kat 
 tre Ka\ TaXX* fjHir) Kara tov avrov 
 \6yov. 
 
 13. T77SS17 — dvdyKr}] "Well, of 
 this mental mex*chandize one 
 
 And the 
 trade in 
 mental 
 
86 
 
 riAATQNOS 
 
 conducted 
 
 either 
 through 
 
 fliHjiit'nl 
 display, or 
 tlie com- 
 munication 
 of points of 
 learning. 
 Ami the 
 learning 
 thus bar- 
 tered may 
 concern the 
 arts, or 
 virtue. 
 The pur- 
 veyor of 
 arts may 
 be called 
 an art- 
 seller: but 
 what name 
 is appli- 
 cable to the 
 seller of 
 virtue ? 
 The name 
 of Sophist 
 alone. 
 
 (7ri8€iKTtKri StKaioTOLTa AeyoiT av, to Se yeXolov p.(v p. 114. 
 oi>x i)ttov tov 7rp6(T0€v, o/aco? Se ixaOrjfxdriov ovaav 
 irpdaiv avrr/v dSeXcjjco tlvl ttj? 7rpdtjecos ovopcaTi 
 irpoaenreiv dvdyKt] ; 
 5 0EAI. Yldvv pev ovv. 
 
 HE. TavTr]9 tolvvv ttj9 p.a0r)fjLaTO7rcoXu<rj? to pev 
 irep\ tol tcov aXXcov Te^ycov pa0rjp.aTa eWepcp, to 8e <; 
 irep\ to t?}s dpeTrjs aXXco 7rpocrpr)Te'ov. 
 
 0EAI. ITeS? yap ov ; 
 10 HE. TeyyoirtoXiKov p.r/v to ye irepi rdAAa av 
 appLOTTor to Se irep\ Tama av 7rpodvp.rj0i]TL Xeyeiv 
 ovopa. 
 
 0EAI. Kai tl Tis dv aXXo ovopca el7rcov ovk av 
 TT\r\p.p.eXoir) ttXtjv to vvv tjpovpevov aiWo eivai to 
 15 crofpLcrTiKOv yevos ; 
 
 HE. OvSev aAAo. ffli vvv crvvaydytopLev avTO, 
 AeyovTes d>9 to KTrjTiKrjs, pL€Tal3Ar)TiKrj9, dyopaaTiKrjs; 
 
 kind might be most fairly term- 
 ed the art of display : but there 
 is another, which will sound 
 no less oddly than the last, but 
 yet, as dealing in learned ware, 
 it must be called by some 
 name which smacks of learn- 
 ing." Heind. and Stallb. think 
 that yeXoIoK applies to the 
 name fiadrj^aToncoXtKrj as com- 
 pared with -^vxefiTTopiKr], and 
 suggest yeXoiw. The interpre- 
 tation is probably right, but 
 the emendation is unnecessary. 
 
 (13.) \}fvx€finopiKris] The word 
 calls up the same contemptible 
 association which is contained 
 in ^vxaycoyla. Compare also 
 the expression of Soph. Antig. 
 1063 : as (ifj efi.TTo\r]<T(ov tadi 
 Trjv efxrjv (fipeva. 
 
 7. ere pep — nXXw] For the 
 
 variety, cf. Theset. 185 a : a 6Y 
 
 krepas <Wd/ifco? aloOavei, dBvva- 
 tou 6Y oXXt/s ravT aladeadai. 
 alib. 
 
 IO. TO TT€p\ TaW(l\ Cf. TO TT€p\ 
 
 TrjV wXrjyrjv, SUpr. 22 1 b. 
 
 av app.0TT0i\ Tvpoo-eiireiv niUSt 
 
 be repeated in thought. 
 
 14. aiiTo eivai] Pleonastic re- 
 sumption. 
 
 16. Ov8ev ciWoJ Sc. (Ittuv ovk 
 
 av 7rXT]nne\olr]. In the follow- 
 ing recapitulation fj,eTaP\r)TiKr} is 
 again used for dXXanT iKrj, and the 
 distinction between avronayXiKfi 
 and dWaKTiKr) is omitted, al- 
 though alluded to in the next 
 sentence. 
 
 17. p.eTap'KTiTiKris] Bodl. fieTa- 
 (BXrjriKov, which is, however, 
 probably taken from a few 
 lines below. 
 
20M2TH2. 
 
 37 
 
 p. 224. IjJLiropiKris, ylrvyepiropLKiis irepi Xoyov? Kai pa6r)paTa 
 dpeTrjs 7ra)XrjTiKov Sevrepov dve<pdvr/ cro<.j)L(JTiKr}. 
 
 GEAI. MaXa ye. 
 
 HE. 'YpiTOv Se y olpal ere, Kav e\ tis avrou 
 KaOibpvpLevos ev 7roXei, ra p.ev wvoi>p.evos, to. 8e KC115 
 TeKTaivopevos avTO? paOrjpara irep\ tol avra ravra 
 
 KCU 7T&)AC0J>, €K TOVTOV TO tflV TTpOVTOL^aTO, KaXeiV 
 
 ovSev dXXo ttXtjv hrrep vvv hr\. 
 GEAI. Tt 8 ov fi€\\a> ; 
 
 HE. Kai to KT7)TiKrj9 dpa p€Ta(3Ar)TiKOV, dyopa-10 
 e o~tikov, Kanrr]\iK.ov elre avT07rcoXiKov, dptpoTepcos, o tl 
 
 7T€p OLV fj 7T€pl TOL TOLCLVTO. pa07]/J.aTOTTCoXlKOV yeVO$, 
 
 del av Trpoaepels, to? (fialvei, o~o<Picttik6v. 
 
 GEAI. ' AvayKr}' rco yap Xoyco del crvvaKoXovOelv. 
 HE. "Eri Or) crKO7rc0p,ei>, ei tivl Toiq>8e irpocreoiKev 15 
 p. 225. apa to vvv pteTaSicoKopevov yevos. 
 GEAI. Uolco 8rj ; 
 
 HE. Tr}9 KTTjTlKrjs dyCOVLGTLKr) TL pepOS Tjplv TjV. 
 
 4. Kav et tis avrov Ka6i8pv- 
 (xevos iv TrdXet] The former de- 
 finition included all the greater 
 Sophists (including Zeno, see 
 1 Ale. 119 a), this applies to 
 some lesser lights, such as Anti- 
 phon, and Damon the musician, 
 perhaps to Antisthenes, though 
 it is not certain that he taught 
 for pay. Cf. Men. 92 b (Any- 
 
 tlis' speech) : e'tre tis gevos eVt- 
 X*ipri tolovtov ti noielv e'ire dcrros. 
 
 5. ra 8e na\ reKTaivofievos] 
 I.e. avrovpyos &>v rmv pad^pdrav. 
 
 6. 7Tep\ ra avra. ravTa] Sc. 
 
 to ttjs dpeTrjs : so also tt. to. 
 ToiaiJTa infr. 
 
 II. Kcmr]\iK6v ei're auro7TC»Xi- 
 kov] This alternative is justi- 
 fied by the words to. ph — 
 
 The same 
 is found tu 
 apply, 
 thirdly, to 
 
 I he Iiihik 
 
 merchant 
 
 or nianu- 
 faeturer 
 of learned 
 stores. 
 
 avTos in the preceding sen- 
 tence. Cf. Protag. 313 c : 
 
 6 vo<pl(TTr)S epnopos Tis t] xci- 
 
 7rjjXoy. The distinction between 
 
 Ka7TT]XlKTj and aVTOTTCO^lKT] (&S B, 
 
 pai't of p.eTaj3\T)TiKri) has been 
 taught above, p. 223 d. 
 
 13. as (paivei] Cf. Rep. 3, 389 
 a : ovk dnodtKTeov Kara tov aov 
 Xoyov. Et o~v, eCpTj, /3oi/Xei epov 
 TiBivai, ov yap ovv 8rj dnodeKTe'ov. 
 
 14. Xo'yw] Bodl. All. Xoyt/cw. 
 
 This corruption is no doubt due 
 to the frequency of the same 
 termination in what precedes. 
 
 18. dyayvio-TLKT)] Supr. 219 e. 
 
 Distinguished from 6-qpevTiKr] 
 as the violent from the secret 
 mode of appropriation without 
 contract. 
 
38 
 
 nAATQNOS 
 
 Once more, 
 dividing 
 
 violent 
 conquest, 
 
 which was 
 a portion 
 of acquisi- 
 tive art, 
 into emula- 
 tion and 
 contention: 
 we see that 
 bodily con- 
 tention is 
 the art of 
 quelling 
 by force. 
 Logical 
 contention, 
 on the 
 other hand, 
 is the art 
 of contro- 
 versy. 
 
 Contro- 
 versy is 
 either 
 forensic, 
 being held 
 through 
 long 
 
 speeches in 
 public on 
 
 of right, 
 or disputa- 
 tious, con- 
 sisting of 
 short ques- 
 tions and 
 answers in 
 private. 
 
 GEAI. Hi> yap ovv. ]>. 
 
 HE. OvK OL7TO TpOTTOV TOLVVV «OTi SlUipf'tV aVTTjV 
 
 6Y X a. 
 
 GEAI. Ka&' OTToia Ae'ye. 
 5 HE. To p.lv a/AiAAr/TiKov avrr}? TiOevTav, to Se 
 p.ayr]TiK.6v. 
 
 GEAI. "Eo-tlv. 
 
 SE. Tr]9 toivvv fia\r]TtKr)9 rw fiev acofiaTL irpos 
 crcD/JuxTa yiyvopevco o~\(E^ov eiKos /ecu 7rpeirov bvopa 
 io Xtyeiv tl tolovtov Tiflefievovs olov (3taaTLKov. 
 GEAI. Noi. 
 
 HE. Tc3 8e \6yoL9 TTpos \6yov? tl tls, d> Gecu- 
 TrjTe, ctAAo thrr) irXrjv apL^ia^-qTrjTLKOV ; J> 
 
 GEAI. Ovk'v. 
 r? HE. To Se ye 7rep\ tols ap.(f)icr(3r)Tr]o-€i'? OeTe'ov 
 Slttov. 
 
 GEAI. Ufj; 
 
 HE. Kac? ocrov fxev yap ylyveTat p.rjKeai re irpos 
 IvavTia /xrjKr) Xoycov kou irep\ to. 8Uaia /ecu aSiKa 
 20 8r)pocria, StKaviKov. 
 GEAI. Nat. 
 
 2. citto] So the Bodleian 
 MS. here as in Theset. 143 c. 
 
 5. T6 (iev apikXrjTtKov — to 8e 
 paxqTiKov] Perhaps there is 
 here the germ of the fine 
 thought which is more fully 
 expressed in Legg. 5, 731 a: 
 
 (piXoveiKelra Se rjp.1v 7ra? irpbs 
 dperrjV d<p66va>s. 6 pev yap toiovtos 
 ras TToXeis av£ei, apiWtopevos fiev 
 avTos, tuvs aWovs Be oi koXovoov 
 BiaftoXals. Cf. Criti. 1 09 b : 
 Oeoi — airaaav yr)v — BieXdy^avov, 
 ov Kar epiv. 
 
 9. ytyvopevco] Cf. SUpr. 2 20 e. 
 
 I O. Xeyciv Ti6epevovs] A 
 
 periphrasis for rldco-dai. " To 
 use some s\ich name, assign- 
 ing it." For Tideo-dai in this 
 sense, cf. Theset. 157 c : <a — 
 avdpwnov — rldevrai. 
 
 1 2. \6yois 7rpos Xoyovs] Sc. 
 yiyvopeva. 
 
 1 8. Kad* 00-ov pev yap] yap not 
 
 only answers the question, but, 
 in doing so, gives a reason for 
 the previous statement. 
 
 19. Trepl ra BiKaia kq\ nSiKa] 
 
 These words apply also to the 
 next division. 
 
20<M2TH2. 
 
 39 
 
 HE. To 6" eV idiots au Kai KaraKeKeppaTta pivov 
 epcdrrjaeai irpos onroKpiatis p.a>v eWur/xeOa kuXiiv 
 dXXo 7rXrjv dvTtXoyiKov ; 
 
 6EAI. Ov&v. 
 
 J5?E. ToO 8e dvriXoyiKov to fiev, oaov Trepi rot 
 ^Vfi^oXaia a/JL(pLo-(3r]T€'LTai fxev, ukt} 8e kou ure^yois 
 irep\ avTO wparreTai, raura Oereov p.tv eiSos, tirehrep 
 avTO SieyvuiKev cos erepov ov 6 Xoyos, drap eiroovv- 
 fxias ovff v7ro twv epnrpoaOev trvytv ovre vvv v(f) 
 rjficou Tvyelv d^tov. 
 
 0EAI. ' hXrfOrj' Kara crp.iKpd yap Xiav kou irav- 
 ToBonra. SirjprjTai. 
 
 SE. To 5e ye evre^yov, kou nepl SiKatcov avrcoi/ 
 kou dSiKcav kou irepi tcov dXXwv bXcos apLcpiaft-qTovi', 
 dp ouk epicrTLKov av Xiyetv eWurfieOa ; 
 
 Of disputa- 
 tious con- 
 troversy, 
 one kind is 
 nameless, 
 and does 
 not deserve 
 a name, 
 when men 
 higgle over 
 1 contracts. 
 
 Another 
 and more 
 
 systematic 
 form of the 
 15 same thing 
 is when 
 
 I. KaraKeKt ppar lapevov — ano- 
 Kpurets] The construction fol- 
 lows fii]K«Ti -rrpos ivavria fir]Krj 
 Xnycov, by a sort of zeugma, 
 since the dative (of the man- 
 ner) is more natural with 71- 
 yvopevov than KaraKeKep/jiaTKr- 
 ptvov. 
 
 5. Toy 8e dvTi\oyiKov — o\r/pJ7- 
 
 t<h] " Now of controversy that 
 which consists of disputes about 
 contracts, conducted in a ran- 
 dom artless way, must indeed 
 be distinguished as a separate 
 kind, since our dialectic per- 
 ceives in it a determinate cha- 
 racter, but, as it has never yet 
 been named, so it is not worth 
 while for us now to name it." 
 " True ; the fragments into 
 which it is divided are too 
 small and heterogeneous for 
 this." 7rai/ro6a7rd is not exactly 
 in construction with Xlav, but 
 is an expansion of crpixpa. 
 
 ocrov — dp(pia-j3r]Te'iTai pev] The 
 action of the verb becomes the 
 subject of the passive form, 
 
 as in yiyvopevov, avaa-nu>nevov, 
 
 &c, supra. Compare Soph. 
 
 Trach. 167 : TOiai>T e(pa(rKe 
 npos 6c<ou eipappiva tu>v 'Hpa- 
 icKdcov (KTeXtVTciadai irovuv. 
 
 6. dre^vas] Bodl. arexfajy. 
 
 7. 7rparT6rai is impersonal. 
 
 8. encouvpias] Modern poli- 
 tical economy has supplied the 
 missing term, viz. " higgling 
 in the market," except that the 
 word gvpPoXaia extends to 
 other contracts besides those 
 of commerce, including every 
 private matter of dispute, how- 
 ever trifling. 
 
 13. Kai ntpl BiKaicov avronv Km 
 dSiKwv Kal nepl tcov ciXXoov oAws] 
 Compare Theset. 175b: orav — 
 ideXrja-Tj — iKJUrjvai (K tou ti tyoj 
 ae ddiKO) 7 rl ail ept (Is aKerf/iu 
 avTrjs SiKaivavvrjs T( Kal ddiKias, 
 
40 
 
 11AATQN02 
 
 men argue 
 • aecundem 
 artem" on 
 general 
 principles 
 of right. 
 This is 
 Eristic, 
 which may 
 either 
 waste the 
 talker's 
 substance 
 and the 
 hearers' 
 patience, 
 when it is 
 mere loqua- 
 city, or 
 may make 
 a gain of 
 disputa- 
 tion, in 
 which case, 
 what is 
 its right 
 name ? 
 
 This won- 
 derful So- 
 phist has 
 turned up 
 a fourth 
 time. 
 
 GEAI. Yla><i yap ov ; p. 
 
 SE. Tov pcyv ipicTTLKOv to pcev ^piyxaTO^OopLKov , J 
 to Se yjpT)\xa.TiOTiKOV ov Tvyyavei. 
 
 0EAI. YlavTairaai ye. 
 5 SE. Tyv eiraivvpiav tolvvv, iqv eKUTepov del KaXeiv 
 uvtcov, iretpaOcdpev elireiv. 
 
 GEAI. Ovkovv XPV- 
 
 SE. Aokco fJLrju to ye 81 ifiovrjv tyjs irepi Tama 
 SiaTpifBrj? afxeXes tcov OLKelov yiyvopevov, irepi Se 
 
 IOTYJV Xe^lV Tols 7T0AA0i? TCOV UKOVOVTCOV ov pied' 
 
 rjdovrj? aKovofxevov, KaXelaOai Kara yvcopr/v ti)v ifirjv 
 oi>x eWepov d8oXeo~)^iKov . 
 
 GEAI. AeyeTai yap ovv ovtco 7rcos. 
 
 HE. Tovtov TOivvv TovvavTiov, diro tcov ISlcotlkcov c 
 15 epidcov xprjjAaTilppevov, ev tco p.epeu av ireipco vvv 
 threw. 
 
 GEAI. Kal tis dv av elircov e\epov ovk e^aptdpTOi 
 7rXrjv ye tov 6avp.ao~Tov irdXiv eKeivov rJKeiv av 
 
 k.t.X. For oXcoy (referring to 
 avT&v = in a universal manner, 
 
 opposed to Kara apiKpa Kal nav- 
 ToSana), cf. ib. 1 74 a: (pvo-iv 
 e'pevvaipe'vrj t5>v ovtcov eKaarov 
 
 ciXov. The Sophist's art is 
 now described as bearing the 
 semblance of philosophy, and as 
 being engaged with the same 
 class of questions. 
 
 8. to ye Si' rjdovrjs — d8oXeo~)(i- 
 kov] It is possible that the 
 work of Socrates is here ironi- 
 cally described as ' chremato- 
 phthoric,' whereas that of the 
 Sophist is ' chrematistic' Com- 
 pare Polit. 299 c, where in 
 the state which is jealous of 
 the laws the ture statesman or 
 philosopher is said to be called 
 
 by his fellow-citizens dSoAeo-^y 
 
 TIS (TO(pLO-TT]S. 
 
 9. wept Se ttjv Xei-tv — aKovope- 
 vov] These words are inserted 
 in order to indicate the deri- 
 vation of dSoXeo-x^y, quasi d^Sr/s 
 
 ttj Xe£ei. 
 
 18. Trakiv — r\t<.eiv\ Cf. Theset. 
 
 196 bl els tovs avTOvs dvi)Kei 
 
 Xoyovs. Cf. Legg. 3, 683 a : 
 
 TeTl'ipTTj TIS 7]Kei 7ToXlS KdTOlKl^O- 
 
 pevrj. Cf. 7*4 c • nd-Xiv rjplv 
 dpcfua^TjTovpevov eXr]Xv6ev. Hip- 
 parch. 232 a : irdXtv Tplrov rj 
 TeTciprov i)Kei Tjpiv opoXoyovpevov. 
 
 The conjecture of Heindorf, Km 
 t'i tis av, although supported 1 >y 
 the analogy of p. 224 c, km t[ 
 
 tis av aXXo ovopa elncov ovk av 
 
 TrXrjppeXotr), to which av clearly 
 
20M2TH2. 
 
 41 
 
 226. VVV TCTCtpTOV TOV fXiTabnOKOjJieVOU V(Jj r)/J.(t)l> <r<>- 
 
 <pi(TTr)i>. 
 
 SE. OvSeu aAA' ?; to xP 1 ll JiaTL(JTLK0V 7 e ^°fj <*>>> 
 
 €OLK€V, epL(TTLKr)S OV T€)^V1]?, TTjS GlVTiAoyiKr]?, T>/S" 
 
 d/j,(pL(r(3r]Tr)TiKr}?, tt}? fiaymTtia}?, rrj? dyoovtaTiKr)?, 5 
 7-179 KTTjTiKrj? ecTTLV, go? 6 Xoyo? au jie/ir]i>vK€ vvv, 6 
 
 <TO(f)l(TTr)?. 
 
 0EAI. KofjuSf) f±lv ow. 
 
 HE. Opa.9 ovv 009 dXTjOrj Xeyerai to ttolklXov 
 tivai tovto to Or/plov, koll to Xeyo/ievov ov Tjj eTe'pa. k 
 XtjittIov ; 
 
 0EAI. Ovkovv dptyolv xpr]. 
 
 HE. Xpr) yap ovv, /cat /caret 8vva/xiv ye ovtco 
 b 7roi7]T€Oi>, ToiovSe tl pieTaOeovTas i^yo? avTov. /cat 
 
 refers, is not absolutely ne- 
 cessary or certain. 
 
 i. t6v om. Bodl. An. The 
 omission is probably due to 
 the 6[ioioTe\evTov rather than, 
 as Stallbaum imagined, to 
 conjecture : although the in- 
 telligibleness of the phrase r<f- 
 
 Taprov rjKei peTadicoKopevov may 
 
 have assisted the error. 
 
 3. to xp?7/iar£<7TiK6f] His ge- 
 nealogy is this time traced 
 backwards for the sake of va- 
 riety. Cf. infr. 268 c : apxopevov 
 aivb TeXevrrjs. 
 
 4. ipiOTLKrjs ov T(X vr l^\ The 
 insertion of pleonastic words, 
 such as ov in this place, be- 
 longs to the peculiar style 
 which Plato has chosen to 
 adopt. 
 
 9. aKr}6rj Xeyerai to] Cf. 
 Men. 98 b: KCU tovto fioi 80- 
 Kels dA?7#»7 Xeyfiv. Lach. 1 86 a : 
 k<i\ tovto pev a\T)8rj Xeyeis. The 
 
 form dXrjdri Xe'yeis was so fre- 
 quent that the plural predicate 
 
 is retained even with a singular 
 subject. Cf. i. Ale. 109 c : 
 
 7T/30S tcivt cipa TO hiKaiov. 
 
 iroiKikov\ Supr. 223 b, iv paka 
 TToiKiXrjs. 
 
 10. to Srjpinv] The image of 
 the hunt for the Sophist, which 
 was cautiously introduced in 
 p. 218 c, is here advanced 
 somewhat more boldly. 
 
 ov Tjj eTepa \rjTTTeov\ " Not 
 
 to be caught with one hand." 
 This very natural expression, 
 and indeed the colour of the 
 whole passage, is destroyed by 
 Stallbaum, who says that ov t[ } 
 eV. X. is a boxing phrase. If it 
 were so, there would be an in- 
 tolerable confusion of metaphors 
 in what follows. 
 
 14. Toi6v8e peTaOeoi'Tcis t'^i'os 
 
 avTov] We have tried every 
 path which we had opened in 
 searching for the angler, and 
 the Sophist is not yet taken. 
 He is not to be caught with 
 one hand, we must use both : 
 
 His wiles 
 arc mani- 
 fold, and 
 
 so must 
 be our en- 
 deavours. 
 There is a 
 trace of 
 him which 
 we have 
 not yet 
 examined. 
 
42 
 
 riAATQNOS 
 
 Our house- 
 hold ser- 
 vants talk, 
 and bo do 
 we, of sit't- 
 ing, rinsing 
 Bcouring, 
 straining 
 wringing 
 
 /jlol Xeye' ro>v oik^tlkow ovoparcov KaXovfMP arra \>- Z2M 
 
 Also of 
 combing, 
 carding, 
 warping, 
 
 and the 
 like. 
 
 7T0V ; 
 
 0EAI. Kal woXXa' drap irola 67; rol>i> ttoXXcov 
 Trvv6av€L ; 
 : 5 HE. Td roiaSe, olov SiyOeiv re Xeyopcev kol diar- 
 rav kol ftpdrreiv Kou •fdtaKpli/ewf . 
 
 9EAI. Tlfirjv; 
 
 SE. Kal irpos ye rouroi? en. j-aiveiv, Kardyeiu, 
 KepKiteiv, kcu pivpia ev reus reyyaLS dXXa rotavra 
 o evovra eiuardp.e6a. rj yap ; 
 
 0EAI. To iroLOv avrcov irepi (3ovXr/0ei9 SrjXwcrai, 
 7rapa8elyp.ara wpoOels 1 ravra Kara iravrov rjpov ; 
 
 £?E. /\iaiperiKa wov to. Xe^Oevra e'lprjrai ^vp.- 
 iravra. 
 5 0EAI. Nat. 
 
 S*E. Kara rov ep.ov to'lvvv Xoyov coy irep\ ravra 
 
 in other words, we must 
 try another and independent 
 track. This " new scent," how- 
 ever, is not wholly uncon- 
 nected with those previously 
 followed. For the notion of 
 the Elenchus, which is the 
 characteristic now to be set 
 up, has been suggested by the 
 mention of avTikoyiKrj. 
 
 I . Tmv oikctikcov oz/o/xaYcw] 
 
 Throughout these dialogues, 
 by an exaggeration of the cy- 
 nical irony of Socrates, not 
 without a true feeling of the 
 universality of science, the 
 highest thoughts are illustrated 
 by the lowest images. 
 
 Tav olKeriKcov — wov ;] " There 
 are some words in use amongst 
 our menials to which we give 
 currency, I presume ?" 
 
 5. Xeyofitv] Note the intro- 
 
 duction of a fresh verb, re- 
 suming KaXovptv. 
 
 6. Kal iSiaKpiveivi] Unless Bia- 
 Kpiveiv (or SiaKifeiw(l), to "shake 
 up," cf. Ar. Nub. 477) was 
 used in some special technical 
 sense, the word occurs strangely 
 here, and awkwardly antici- 
 pates what follows. " Itaque 
 ni, quod parum probabile, ab 
 aliena manu asserta hsec Kal 
 SiaKpiveiv putentur, in verbo 
 SiaKplveiv aliud videtur delitu- 
 isse, quod felicior aliquando 
 conjector reperiet." Heind. 
 
 16. cos — Texvrjv] Cf. Phileb. 
 18 C : fiiav eV avroly cos ovcrav 
 ypappariKTjv rtx vr ) v «re<£#e'y|aTO 
 irpocrenrcbv. re^vr/v is resumed 
 
 by avTTjv for the sake of clear- 
 ness, as in Theset. 155 d : dvbpCav 
 — nvTcbv. alib. 
 
KXM2TH2. 
 
 43 
 
 p. 226. jaIolv ovaav eV airaai re^yr]v, evbs ovofiaTos afjiw- 
 aofiev avrrjv. 
 
 0EAI. Tiva irpocrenrovTes ; 
 HE. AiaKpLTiKrjv. 
 0EAI. "Eoro). 
 
 HE. 2/C07T6t 5?) TOLVT1]? OLV &VO OLV 7TT) 8vP(OfJ.€$a 
 
 KOLTibelv e'ldrj. 
 
 0EAI. Tayeiav toy efiol (TKe^Lu eir it arrets. 
 d SE. Kal firjv ev ye reus elpypcevais SiaKplaecn rh 
 fiev yeipov a.7ro fieXrlovos airoywpl^eiv rjv, to $' 
 Ofioiov a0' opolov. 
 
 0EAI. ^ye&ov ovto) vvv \ey6ev (palverai. 
 
 HE. T^s* p.€v Toivvv 6vop.a ovk e^co Xeyop.evov' 
 
 All Hi.- 
 are in 
 
 ol 
 
 dividing; 
 but while 
 
 in tliosi- 
 last men- 
 tioned like 
 is divided 
 from like, 
 iii the for- 
 mer the 
 good is 
 separated 
 from the 
 
 4. AiaKpiTLKTjv] Cf. Polit. 
 282 b : peyaka Tive Kara iravra 
 fjpiv tj(TTr}V re^va, 17 crvyKpiTiKr] re 
 
 Kal 8ia<piTiKr]. There is here 
 brought into distinct promi- 
 nence the idea of Difference, 
 (suggested by that of Contro- 
 versy), on which the discussion 
 in this dialogue chiefly turns. 
 
 8. as e/xoi] Cf. Rep. 536 c, 
 d : ovkovv cos y 6/101 ciKpoaTfj. 
 S AXX' ws e'/ioi, tjv 0° iyco, prjropi. 
 Soph. Aj. 395 : epc-fios Si cpaev- 
 vorarov, as e'/iot. For the 
 
 meaning of KepK^eiv, which is 
 not clearly given in the Lexi- 
 cons, see Cratyl. 388 a : Kep- 
 
 Ki£ovres Se tl dpcopev ; ov ttjv 
 KpoKfjv Km tovs CTTrjpovas crvyKe- 
 \vpevovs BiaKp'ivopev ; It seems 
 to have been a process, not 
 merely of making fast, but of 
 giving a regular appearance 
 to the web by means of the 
 comb or KepKis. See Smith's 
 Dictionary of Antiquities, art. 
 Tela, p. 1101 b. 
 
 9. ev ye — 6/10101/j " In the 
 separations above named we 
 saw included the parting of 
 worse from better and of like 
 from like." The past tense 
 implies an appeal to experi- 
 ence. For the limitation of the 
 inference by means of ye, cf. 
 
 Theset- 204 C : ev ye Tois 6cr a e£ 
 apidpov earl. 
 
 to /ieV] E. g. birj6e7v, 8iar- 
 rav, (ipaTTeiv. 
 
 1 0. to Se] E. g. ^alveiv, KaTa- 
 yeiv, Kepul^eiv. 
 
 12. 2xebov — (palverai] "Such 
 does appear to be the case now 
 you have put it into words." 
 uvtco is to be joined with cpai- 
 verai. For Xexdev, cf. the Ho- 
 meric pex&£ v Se re vl]TTios eyvco. 
 Rep. 2, 370 b I evvoco yap kcu aii- 
 tos elrrovros crov. Phileb. 1 4 C : 
 Savpacrrov \e\dev. Legg. 2, 672 
 b : 81a to KciKcos tovs avQpcoivovs 
 avTO VTro\a(3e1v Kal yvcovai \e%6ev. 
 
 Phileb. 45 b : vvv prjBev (pat- 
 
44 
 
 IIAATQN02 
 
 To do 
 
 this is to 
 purify. 
 .Vinl then 
 axe two 
 sorts of 
 purifica- 
 
 First of 
 bodies, 
 whether 
 
 animate or 
 inanimate, 
 there are 
 purgations 
 both in- 
 ternal and 
 external. 
 
 tt}? 8e KaTaXeiirovar}? pev to ftekriov diaKplaea)?, to p. 226. 
 8e yelpov uTrofiaXXovo-rj? ^w. 
 
 BEAI. Aeye tl. 
 
 SE. Ylaaa 1) rotavrr] SiaKpicn?, &)$• eyio tjvvvoco, 
 5 XeyeTai irapa ttolvtoov nadappos T19. 
 
 0EAI. Aeyerat yap ovv. 
 
 S?E. Ovkovv to ye KaQapTiKOv ei8o? av 8l7tXovi> e 
 cw Tray av \8oi ; 
 
 0EAI. N«/, Kara crypXiqv ye 'law ov p.i]v eycoye 
 \oKaOopco vvv. 
 
 aE. Kai ixrjv Ta Trepl Ta acofiaTa iroXXa e?8r] 
 KO-Odpaecav evl irepiXafielv bvop.aTi irpocrrjKei. 
 
 0EAI. Yiola KOI tlvl ; 
 
 £JE. Ta Te tcov (cocav, ocra £vtos acopLaTcov viro 
 ir,yvfxuao~TiKi]^ larpiKYji- Te opOoos 8taKpivo\xeva KaOal- p. 227. 
 peTai Ka\ irepi tolktos, threw p.ev tyavXa, ocra (3aXa- 
 
 4. as eyw £vvvoa>\ " As I 
 
 perceive ou taking a general 
 survey :" i. e. by a process of 
 
 ovvayayr). 'O yap (twotttlkos 
 StaXeKTiKos. (Rep. 7, 537 C.) 
 
 5. Ka.6apiJ.6s rts] The thought 
 which is here introduced, that 
 philosophy is a purification of 
 the soul, has an affinity with 
 Pythagorean doctrine, and is 
 in harmony with the Phsedo. 
 The same idea is applied to the 
 science of government in the 
 Politicus, 293 d. Cf. also Legg. 
 5,735. tis marks the introduc- 
 tion of a fresh notion. Cf. Polit. 
 
 299 c: els 8rj ti hiKa<TTT)piov. 
 
 II. 7roXXa] Sc. ovra. 
 
 I 2. Kadapcremv] " processes of 
 cleansing." For the variation of 
 the word, cf. Legg. 9, 868 c, d : 
 
 Kaddpaeis Kadappovs, ib. 735 c - 
 
 14. Ta. re t5>v £d>a>v — icadal- 
 
 perai] " I mean both cleans- 
 ings of living bodies, including 
 such right separations and pur- 
 gations as are effected within." 
 
 15. tiaKpivopeva] Compare 
 Phileb. 46 e : tS> to. o-vyKeKpi- 
 piva /3('a 8ia\fiv r\ to. bianeKpipeva 
 trvyxelv. Ar. Eth. Nic. VII. 1 4, 
 § 6 : 01 8e p(\ay)(okiKoi Trp> (pvcriu 
 del biovrat larpeias Kal to crcopa 
 8aKvopevov SiareXeZrat 81a tt/v 
 
 Kpao-iv, where similar physio- 
 logical notions are implied. 
 
 16. 7repi tclkt6s\ Sc. KaBaipo- 
 
 ptva. The notion of e'i8rj is 
 not distinctly repeated with 
 So-a, which is the cognate sub- 
 ject (in apposition to the ac- 
 tion) of 8iaKpivopeva Kadalperai. 
 I. e. ocra 8. k. = oo~ai 8iaicpio-eis 
 re Kal Kadappo\ yiyvovrai. 
 
 elnew pev fpavka] Sc. ei8os 8e. 
 e\ovTa 6pa>s. 
 
20<M2TH2. 
 
 45 
 
 p. 227. vevTLKii Trapi^erai' Kai tu>v d\j/v)(a)V acofiarcou, <l)v 
 yvctffievTiKT) kgu ^ypunaaa Koa/xrjTiKi) tyjv tTTifitXtLav 
 7rape)(0/xei>rj /caret afiiKpa 7roAAa kcil yeXoia Sokovptu 
 6v6f.1a.Ta eaytv. 
 
 0EAI. MaXaye. 5 
 
 £?E. YlavTa-naai jiev ovv, co QeaiTr)T6. aAAct yap 
 
 2. yvacpevriKr] Kai £vpircura ko- 
 
 <rnrjTiKT)] It is implied that 
 yvafavTLKr], cloth-dressing, is a 
 department of Koup-qTiKt], the art 
 of making neat. This is dis- 
 tinctly affirmed in Polit. 282 a: 
 
 ttoXX?^s~ ovarjs tj)? KoaprjTLKrjs rovv- 
 Tauda avTTJs popiov (Ikos nepikap.- 
 (Bdveiv KvaCpevTtKrj. The WOrd 
 
 Koa-ixrjTiKrj is not found elsewhere 
 in this sense, and Dr. Badham, 
 following the analogy of Valck- 
 naer's correction (?) of Hdt.VII. 
 209 (ras KecpaKas [ko]<t piovrai) , 
 would prefer a-p?™*?/. But it 
 should be borne in mind that 
 " washing " and " darning " 
 (TrXvvTiKr] Kai aneaTiKT), Polit. I.e.) 
 are included in the art in ques- 
 tion. " Kenovation" is not 
 quite an equivalent, because 
 KoaprjTiKri implies dressing or 
 " brushing up" the new clothes 
 as well as the old. 
 
 ttjv inipfKeiav Trape^o/ue'vi/ Kara 
 
 a-piKpa] " Attending to which 
 things in a variety of minute 
 departments, the processes of 
 fulling and other furbishing 
 have earned a great number of 
 what are thought ridiculous 
 names." 
 
 3. ye\o7a Sokovvto] " Which 
 are thought ridiculous," — since 
 no name really is so which con- 
 veys a genuine meaning. Cf. 
 Rep. 7, 538 b : oIkclovs Sokovv- 
 ras. Thcset. 153 a: to — dvai 
 
 8okovi>. Ibid. 176 d: Seu/oV^rts 
 toKovam. And compare Legg. 
 
 7, 799 d • 7i"oXXa Kai apiKpa 
 SoKovvTa thai vopipa. 
 
 4. ea-x ev ] Cf. Rep. 6, 502 d : 
 
 tTTfitrj ravra poyis riXos tcr)(fV. 
 
 6. Havranao-i ptv ovv] "There 
 can be no doubt of their 
 being thought absurd. But 
 then, Theretetus, the spirit of 
 method cares neither more 
 nor less for sponging than for 
 physicking, if it be so that 
 the one does us small service 
 and the other great in the 
 way of purifying. For her 
 endeavour is to know what is 
 and is not kindred in the whole 
 range of the sciences and arts ; 
 wherefore she pays equal ob- 
 servance to them all, and where 
 she finds resemblance between 
 things, she counts the one no 
 whit more ridiculous than the 
 other ; nor does she esteem 
 him who gives generalship as 
 an instance of "pursuit" at all 
 more decorous but as a rule 
 rather more affected than one 
 who prefers the example of 
 vermin-killing." For the verb 
 o-noyyifa, see Dem. de Cor. 313. 
 12 ; Aristoph. Thesm. 247. 
 This clause refers to the many 
 minute branches of KoaprjTiKr] 
 of which (T7ToyyiaTiKTj is one, 
 rather than to the cktos <a6ap- 
 
 (TtlS TG)V &OCOJ/. 
 
 (This occa- 
 sions the 
 remark 
 
40 
 
 IJAATQNOS 
 
 thai bci- 
 entific 
 method 
 ignores the 
 common 
 standards 
 of mean 
 and high.) 
 
 Tjj tcou Xoycov fx(0u8o) iTTroyyioTiK^s i] (f)apfxaK07ro- p 
 (Tias ovfttv i)Ttqv ou8e tl pdXXov rvy)(ai>€i /xeAoi>, el 
 to fj.€i> (TfjiiKpd, rh 8e p.eyd\a tj/jlos cof/jeAet KaOrxipov. 
 tov KTycraaOai yap eveKa vovv iraawv Ttyywv to b 
 5 ijvyyeves kou to fir) ^vyyeves KOLTavoelv Treipajfuevrj 
 ti/ulu Trpos tovto i£ 'ictov 7rdcra?, /cat Oarepa twv 
 irepcov kclto, tyjv bp.oioTr\Ta ovhlv rjyeiTOU yeXoioTepa, 
 aepLVOTepov Se tl tov Sid aTpaTTjyiK^y ?) (f)6eipicrTiKr}s 
 8r)\ovvTa 6-qpevTLK.rjV ov8ei> vevopaKev, aAA' a>? to 
 
 1 . o-noyyurrLKris] " The art 
 
 of cleansing with the sponge." 
 dX\a ydp implies, " But the 
 apparent absurdity of the 
 names is nothing to us, for," 
 &c. 
 
 2. ov8e Tl paWov] Cf. Rep. 
 I, 339 b : ovira 8rj~kov ovS" el 
 
 peydXyj. From a humorous 
 determination to be strictly 
 impartial, it is purposely left 
 doubtful which is to be con- 
 sidered the more useful art. 
 Plato seems to have changed 
 his opinion on the subject of 
 pharmacy. Compare Rep. 3, 
 407 with Tim. 89 c, d. 
 
 4. tov KTrjcracrdai evexa vovv] 
 Compare Polit. 272 c : irvvda- 
 
 vopevoi napa ndo~r]s <fivo~ecos ei 
 two. Tts I8iav 8vvapiv e^ovaa 
 fjcrdeTO ti 8td(popov Tav aXXcov 
 els avvayvppbv <fipovr)0~eoos. 
 
 to avyyeves Kai to prj crvy- 
 yeves] Cf.Rep. 7,531 C : iav pev 
 em Trjv aXXrjXcov koivcdvlciv a(piKr]- 
 Tai Kai avyyeveiav, Kai avWoyurdj} 
 ravra fi icrTiv dXKrjXois olKela, (pe- 
 peiv ti avTcov els a ftovXopeda ttjv 
 TvpaypaTelav, Kai ovk dvovijTa iro- 
 velaBai, el 8e prj, dvovrjTa. 
 
 7. KaTO. TT)V OpOlOTTjTa] I. e. 
 
 fj ToiavTa io-Ti. " In respect of 
 their resemblance," — to which 
 
 in the act of generalizing her 
 attention is confined. 
 
 8. o-epvoTepov] " More decor- 
 ous or refined." Cf. Theset. 
 
 1 50 a : (pevyovai Kai ttjv jrpopvr]- 
 CTTiKrjV are aepvai ovaai ai palai. 
 
 Compare Parm. 130c: ore oi8ev 
 amwv aTipdo-eis. Phileb. 58 C, 
 
 Phsedr. 261 b. Polit, 266 d : 
 
 o ti tt) TOia8e pe668a> tcov \6ya>v 
 ovTe aepvoTepov pakXov epe^rjo-ev 
 
 r) p^j. It is a true reflection, 
 though here ironically applied, 
 that science ignores the fasti- 
 diousness of the senses and the 
 prejudices of a refined taste, 
 and, as Lord Bacon says, 
 " iEque palatia et cloacas in- 
 greditur nee tamen polluitur." 
 Nov. Organ. 1, 120. Compare 
 also the defiance of ridicule in 
 Rep. 5, 452. And see the re- 
 marks of Mr. Grote on the pas- 
 sage of the Parmenides above 
 cited, Plato &c, vol. ii. p. 268. 
 tl — ov8ev] Cf. Pha?d. 74 a: 
 
 oiS' oXXo Tl TQ)V TOIOVTCOV Ol)8£v. 
 
 9. BrjpevTiKTjv] Plato seems 
 to have been fond of the no- 
 tion of a science of 6rjpevTi<rj 
 which should include war, ty- 
 ranny, the chase, rhetoric, and 
 sophistry under one head. Cf. 
 supr. p. 222, Euthyd. 290 b, 
 
20M2TH2. 
 
 47 
 
 p. 227. 7roXv yavvoTtpov . kcu 8rj kcu vvv, onep rfpov, tl 
 irpoorepovpev ovopa ^vpTrdcras SvvdptLs, oarat atop.a 
 e'/re epL\\rvypv e'/re axj/vxoi' ^dXrj^aau^ KaOaipeiv, ov8eu 
 c avrfj diolcrei, iroiov tl Ae)(0ei> tvirpeTrecrTaTov eluai 
 So^eC fiovov i)(€Tco ^W/Ois" tcov Trjs ^vyr)? KaOdpaewu 5 
 ■ndvTO. £vv§r}(rav ocra aAAo tl Kadalpei rov yap 
 7rep\ tt]v hidvotav KtxOappov diro tcou dXKcov tiriKt- 
 )(etpr)K€i> d(f)opicra(70ai ra vvv, ei ye oirep /3oi>Aerou 
 pavOdvopev. 
 
 GEAI. 'AAAa pepdOrjKa, kcu avyywpw Svo p.ev 10 
 eldr] KtxOdpcrem, ev Se to irep\ T-qv ^v)q~\v eldos elvau, 
 tov irep\ to acopa x^pts ou. 
 
 HE. YIdi>TGL>i> KaWiaTa. koii pot to peTtx 
 
 Polit. 299 d, Rep. 2, 373 b, 
 Legg. 7, 823 ; see also Epin. 
 975 c. 
 
 1. onep rjpov] Supr. 226 e: 
 7roia kcu tivi. "And so now, 
 with respect to the question 
 you have asked, What name is 
 to be given to all faculties 
 whose province is to cleanse 
 animate or inanimate bodies, 
 she will not care, what expres- 
 sion will sound most seemly." 
 t'i ivpoo-ep. is explanatory of onep, 
 whose antecedent is in the ac- 
 cusative of respect after cWo-«. 
 ovBiv is adverbial, and the 
 subj. of Siotaei is the clause 
 
 TTOIOV Tl t)6£;€l. 
 
 3. felXrjCpaaif ] So all the 
 MSS. except a corrector of Par. 
 B.,who gives el\r)x a0 ~ L (thus, d\rj- 
 
 cpacn). Although it is difficult 
 to bring forward another in- 
 stance of Xapl3dv(o used exactly 
 in this sense, or followed by 
 an infinitive, it is not quite 
 
 certain that elXrjcpao-i here is 
 wrong. Cf. Legg. 1, 624 a: 
 t'i\7](pe ttjv alriav. lb. 6, 768 d : 
 ttjv Tr\ei(TTr]P vopndeaiav elXrjcpaai. 
 
 Hdt. IIL71. See also Phileb. 
 37 b, and the Zurich Editors' 
 preface to the Philebus, p. xiv. 
 There is, however, a much 
 greater internal probability in 
 favour of elXi^xao-i. Cf. Thea?t. 
 
 I49 b : ttjv ~Xo%eiav e'lXrj^f. 
 Tim. 5 2 a: tovto b 8tj vorjcris 
 
 c'lXlJXfV eTTlCTKOTTflv. lb. 38 d: Tt]V 
 
 ivavTiav elk-qxbs avr<o bvvap.iv. 
 
 5. c^ero)] Sc. to Aex#eV ovopa. 
 Cf. Rep. 7,533 e: fori 8', as efjLol 
 SokcZ, ov nep\ ovopaTos cipcpio-fti]- 
 
 TTJO-IS, oh TOaOVTCOV TVipl aKC\JMS 
 
 oo-oji/ fjpiv TrpoKeirai. Oil yap 
 ovv, ecprj' aXA' o civ povov S77X0T 
 irpbs ttjv egiv Q-aCpTjvciq, a Ae'yci 
 iv tyvxri. 
 
 7. eniKextiprjKev] Sc. fj tcov 
 "Koycov Tex vr l- 
 
 IO. 8vo — Kaddpaecos] eivai 
 
 must be supplied from the 
 folio wins: clause. 
 
 Secondly, 
 there are 
 purifica- 
 tions of 
 the mind, 
 whereby 
 the evil is 
 separated 
 from the 
 good. 
 
48 
 
 [IAATQN02 
 
 TOVTO tTTUKOVe 7T€Ll 
 
 ipco/J.evo<> av TO \t\QfV Si)(rj p. 
 
 T€fXV€lV. 
 
 BE A I. KaO* oiroV av v(j)i]yr}, 7reipa.o-op.ai croi 
 avvTepiveiv- 
 5 HE. Ylovtjplav krepov uperi]9 ev "^v)(rj Xeyo/iev 
 ti ; 
 
 0EAI. ricos" yap ov ; 
 
 SE. Kai fJLrjv KaOap/xo? rjv to XnreTv fiev #«Ye- 
 pov, €K(3dAA€ii> 8e ocrov av r) irov ti (pXavpov. 
 io 0EAI. 'Hv yap ovv. e 
 
 iHE. Kai yj/vxr}? apa Kaff oo~ov av evplcrKcofjiev 
 KaKias d(palp€o-iv Tiva, Kadapfxov avTOv XeyovTeg ip 
 pLeAci <p0€ytj6fi€0a. 
 
 0EAI. Kal fiaXa ye. 
 Now men- 15 HE. Auo fiev e'ISr) KaKia? irep\ \^v)(r}v pryriov. 
 
 tal evils „ 
 
 are of two WJiAl. II Ota; 
 
 kinds, cor- ^_ v v ^ , , , v 
 
 responding All.. 10 /XC^ OiO^ VOCTOV €V CTGO/JLaTL, TO O 0L0V P« 
 
 andugii- alaxo? iyyiyvo^evov. 
 
 ness in the AT , . T r ^. > ,/ ,, 
 
 body: (3EA1. (Ju/c e\xadov. 
 
 I. enaKove TTtipaipevos] Bad- 
 ham elegantly conjectures eira- 
 KoXouOei : and, less happily, 
 Treipaptvco. Cf. Polit. 26 1 a : 
 dW £naKo\ov6a>v avvrepve. See 
 
 however Legg. 900 d : «ai o-$o- 
 
 8pa -ye eVijKoue. it). 905 d. 
 5. aper^s] Bodl. (ip rrjs. 
 
 8. X«reu/] So all the MSS. 
 " To leave once for all what is 
 not evil, but continually to 
 throw out Avhatever evil is 
 found anywhere." So the dif- 
 ference of tense may be ex- 
 pressed. The action of Xcrrdv 
 is viewed as final, that of eK/3dX- 
 Xeiv as continuous. Heind. conj. 
 Xeineiv. 
 
 9. nov] " anywhei'e." I. e. (in 
 the present instance) " in any 
 region of the soul." 
 
 II. ^v^y] Gen. after KaKi'ay 
 d(paipeaiv and ica.9app.6v. Cf. 
 supr. 224 a and note. 
 
 I 2. avrbv refers to d(paip€(Tiv, 
 
 but agrees in gender by at- 
 traction with Kadappov. 
 
 iv p,e\,i\ Cf. Phileb. 28 
 
 b : iva pr] — napa /xe'Xor (pdey^ai- 
 
 ne6d ti. " In tune," i. e. con- 
 sistently. 
 
 15. Auo jtev e'lSt] Kaicias] The 
 implied apodosis, which is 
 postponed by the explanation 
 
 which follows, is 8vo 8e KaBappwv. 
 18. iyytyvoptvov] Sc. iv tyvxfj. 
 
20M2TH2. 
 
 49 
 
 228. HE. Nocrov tcrays koll aracnv ov tolvtov vevo- 
 
 fllKOLS. 
 
 0EAI. Ovdi av npos tovto eyco tl \pi'j p.e diro- 
 KpivaaOai. 
 
 HE. YloTepov aXXo tl ardaii/ yyovptevo? y ttjv 5 
 tov (frvaei Ijvyyevov? e/c tlvos 8ia(popa? 8ia<jj0opdv; 
 
 GEAI. Ov8ev. 
 
 SE. 'AAA' auryps aXXo tl wXrjv to ttjs ufAeTpias 
 iravTaypv SvaeiSes ov ye'vo?; 
 b 6EAI. OvSafias aAAo. to 
 
 HE. TV 8e; iv yj/vxi) 86tja? eniOvfilais koll Ov/jlov 
 ■qftovcus koll Xoyov XviraL? koll wdvTa dXXrjXois touto. 
 tcov (j)Xavpo)? ixovTQjv ovk fjaO^fieOa 8La(pepopeva ; 
 
 0EAI. Kal a(j)68pa ye. 
 
 HE. Evyyevrj ye firjv ef apdyicrjs ^vprnavTa ye- 15 
 yovev. 
 
 GEAI. Y\m yap ov; 
 
 HE. ^TLXCFLV dpa KOLL VOCTOV TYjS ^V\rjs TTOVrjpLOLV 
 
 \eyovTes opOco? epovp.ev, 
 
 GEAI. 'OpOoTOLTOL [lev OVV. 20 
 
 e HE. T/ 8' ; ocra KLvrjcrecos pieTacr\6vTa kcll o~ko- 
 
 Vicc is 
 
 analogov 
 
 to (lineage, 
 
 and both 
 
 iiro similar 
 to civil 
 war. For 
 each is a 
 corruption 
 of kindred 
 elements 
 arising 
 from some 
 dissension. 
 
 3. OiS' av] Referring to ovk 
 epadov snpr. 
 
 6. etc tivos 8ia(f>opdt 8ia(p8apdv] 
 
 This is the MS. reading: that 
 of Cornarius, taken from a 
 quotation of this passage by 
 Galen, 8icxp8opds diacpopav, being 
 supported only by a correction 
 in Par. F. The object is to 
 shew that sedition is a disease ; 
 and it is more natural to speak 
 of disease as a dissolution or 
 decay of kindred elements in 
 consequence of some dissen- 
 sion amongst them, than as a 
 
 dissension arising from some 
 decay. 
 
 11. §o£u? emdvpiais k.t.X.] Cf. 
 Rep. 4, 439, 440. 
 
 12. Xoyov Xv7raiy] Cf. Rep. 3, 
 387, 338. 
 
 1 3. Twv<p\avpu>s €)(6vTav] These 
 words are an afterthought, and 
 are placed in immediate con- 
 struction with Tavra (viz. So|. 
 «V. 8vp. i]8. Xoy. Xv7T.). TTovTjpia 
 
 appeared above as a general 
 word, but is here used with 
 a special meaning, as distin- 
 guished from dpaOla. 
 
50 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 [gnorance 
 is n kind of 
 deformity, 
 and may 
 
 be c l- 
 
 pared t" 
 tlie bodily 
 state, i?i 
 which the 
 movements 
 of different 
 members 
 are inhar- 
 monious 
 and fail of 
 accom- 
 plishing 
 their end. 
 
 irov Tiva de'fjLeva, 7reipa>/j.ei>a tovtuu Tvy^aveiv, KaO' p. 
 €KacrTiiu 6pfM]i> 7rupafj)opa avTov ylyverai koll diro- 
 rvyyavet, irorepov avra (j)rjaop.ei-> viro avppLerpla^ 
 tyjs 7T/309 akXtjXa rj rovvavTiov viro d/jLerpla? avid 
 5 irdayetVj 
 
 0EAI. ArjAov coy viro d\xeipla<s. 
 
 HE. 'AAAa }xtjv yj/vxrjv ye \a/j.ei> aKOvaav irdaav 
 irdv dyvoovaav. 
 
 6EAI. l(/)6Spa ye. 
 io HE. To ye f±r}v ayvoelv eariv eV dkr)6eiav opfxco- 
 p.evr)s \j/v)(r)?, 7rapa(p6pov ^vveaeoos yiyvop-evi-js, ovSev d 
 aXXo irXr/v irapa(f>pocrvvr). 
 
 0EAI. Wdvv p.ev ovv. 
 
 228. 
 
 i. 7mpa)/iei>a] The omission 
 of this word in the Bodleian 
 MS. is probably due to the 
 
 6po 107 eXeVTOV of 6£\i.tva.. 
 
 2. napdcpopa avrov] Sc. rov 
 o-Konov, " swerving from the 
 mark." 
 
 In Tim. 87 e (where the 
 word napacpopoTTjs is used) the 
 same connexion is noticed be- 
 tween irregularity of action 
 and disproportion of parts. 
 
 4. avra wdcrxeiv] " Are thus 
 
 affected." For the neut. plur., 
 cf. Theset. 207 e, and note. 
 Compare Ar. Eth. Nic. I. 13 : 
 
 arenas yap Kaddnep ra rrapa'Xe- 
 Xvpiva rov crcoparos peprf els to. 
 he^ia npoaipovpevov Kivrjcrai rov- 
 vavriov els ra apto~repa 7rapa(fie- 
 perai, K.a\ en\ rrjs tjsvxrjs ovrcos' 
 eiri ravavria yap al oppa\ rcov 
 aKparcoW dXX' ev rols a-copaat pev 
 opaipev to irapacpepopevov, enl 8e 
 ttjs yj/vxrjs oi>x opcopev. But 
 what Aristotle thus describes 
 approaches more nearly to 
 
 what Plato hei*e calls o-rdo-is 
 
 rrji ^vxrjS. 
 
 7 . \jfvxr)v ye — dyvoovaav ] 
 
 This is emphatically the na- 
 ture of " soul" or " mind" — 
 according to the well-known 
 Socratic or Platonic principle, 
 which remains unaltered in 
 the Laws. See Legg. 9, 860 d : 
 as oi KaKol txavres els ndvra elalv 
 anovres kokoi. 
 
 II. TTapacpopov £weVecor] An 
 etymological analysis, in the 
 Cratylus vein, of 7rapacppo- 
 o-vvt]. Cf. Legg. 6, 775 d: 
 
 Trapd(popos — 6 pedvwv. 
 
 Trapa<popov o-vvecrecos yiyvo- 
 pevrjs tyvxrjs)] " And what is 
 ignorance, but the aberration of 
 a mind which is bent on truth 
 but swerves aside from under- 
 standing 1 " The gen. crvveo~ea>s 
 is governed by wapa^opov, 
 which agrees with if/vx^s. For 
 this interpretation Ave are in- 
 debted to the acumen of Hein- 
 dorf. 
 
20<I>I2TH2. 51 
 
 p. 228. aE. ^Vv^rjv apa avor^rov ala^pav kou ajJLirpov 
 Oereov. 
 
 GEAI. "Eolk€v. 
 
 HE. "Ran 8)) 8uo ravra, a>9 tyaiveTcu., KdKOiv iv 
 olvtyj yei/7], to /J.6V irovr)pia KaKovfievov vtto twv 5 
 7toAAgw, voaos avrrjs aafpearara ov. 
 
 GEAI. Nat. 
 
 S?E. To oY ye ayvoiav fxev kccAovcti, KaKiav 8e 
 (xvto eV v/'fX^ f^ovov yiyvopcevov ovk tOekovaiv 6/jlo- 
 Xoyeiv. IO 
 
 e 0EAI. Y^ofxibf} avy^coprjreou, o i'W 5?) Xe'tjavTos 
 y/J-fayvor/crd aov, to 8vo eivca yivr) /cowa'ay eV ^v\f}, 
 kou 8ei\iav fiev kcu aKoXaaiav kou olSlklolv ^vfiiravTa 
 r}yi]T€ov voaov Iv tj/mv, to 8e r^y TroXXr]^ kou ttolvto- 
 8aTrrj9 ayvoias iraQos oucryps Qztzov. 15 
 
 HE. Ovkovv Iv acofxaTi ye 7rep\ 8vo iraOr^fiaTe 
 tovtco 8vo Ttyya Tive eyeveadrjv ; 
 
 GEAI. Tive tovtco ; 
 '< 2 9- HE. rieyot /xeV alayos yvpivaaTLKrj, vrepl 8e voaov As gyi 
 
 larpiKq. 20 counter- 
 
 acts defor- 
 mity, and 
 1— *t-i /~\ > — \ \ \ r//-> \ ) o> / v medicine 
 
 A Hi. UVKOVV KOU 7T€pi fX€V vppLV KOU CtOLKiaV KOU disease so 
 
 0EAI. <Paivecr6ov. 
 
 8. KaXovaiv — ovk <i6e\ovo-i] (cf. Symp. 215 c) requires yi- 
 Sc. 01 7roXXot from t5>v noXKcbv yveadm. For the omission of 
 supra. (ivai, cf. infr. 246 e: touto 8e 
 
 9. eV tyvxfi y-ovov yiyvop.(vov\ ov aaifia i'n^/v^ov 6y.o\oyovo~iv. 
 
 I. e. When mental is not com- 13. ^vfiTravra] Stallb. adds 
 
 bined with bodily deformity: ravra from C. F. b, c, unnecessa- 
 
 for the converse of which see rily. For nddos, infr., cf. Theajt. 
 
 Rep. 3, 402 e: or iv \|/i%v 193d: to ttjs dogrjs Trdflos. 
 
 fxovov, "only in the soul," as 16. nepl 8vo TradrjimTc] Cf. 
 
 if that was a matter of less Phsedr. 261 c: nepl ndvra rd 
 
 consequence. Stallb. 's inter- Xeyopeva pia tis rkyvr]. 
 
 pretation, " earn esse eximie 22. Ovkovv kcu] "And in like 
 
 (jxSvov) in animo pravitatem," manner.'' 
 
 H 2 
 
nAATQNOS 
 
 there is 
 chastise- 
 niriit for 
 the cure of 
 vice, and 
 
 instruction 
 
 to remedy 
 tlie more 
 latent evil. 
 
 SeiAiuv y KoAacrriKi] 7T€(f>VK€ rtyvtov paAiara Or) p. 229. 
 7ruau)V irpocn'/Kovaa '[ StKij-f ; 
 
 0EAI. To yovv eiKO?, a>s tLiriiv Kara rr)v avOpu>- 
 irivr)v 8oijai>. 
 5 SE. T/ 6V; 7Tepl £yp.iraao.v ayvoiav fxcou aWrjv 
 TLva ?) bibacTKaXiKyv opOorepov ehroi tis olv ; 
 
 0EAI. Ovdefilav. 
 
 SE. <£>epe 8iy 8L8a<TKaAiKr}s <5e dpa ev \16vov 
 yevos (fxxreov eli>ai rj ttAcwb, Svo 8e rive avrrjs eivat b 
 10 /xeyicTTco, aKOirec. 
 
 0EAI. 2K07TCO. 
 
 HE. Ka/ /uot SoKovpLtu rfjde av irr) rd^iara evpeiv. 
 
 I. 19 KoKnariKT] — tSuo/t] The 
 position of 81kt] in the sentence 
 may be paralleled from many 
 similar inversions in this and 
 other dialogues. Many of 
 Plato's rhythmical sentences 
 end purposely with a dissyl- 
 able, which is often sepa- 
 rated from the natural con- 
 nexion. And 8Ur) is similarly 
 enumerated amongst other 
 arts, including medicine, in 
 
 Gorg. 478 b, C : XprjpaTiaTiKrj 
 p.ev iTivias cmaKKarTei, larpiKJ) 
 8e voo~ov, 8ikt] 8e aKokaaias Kat 
 
 d8iKias. ri ovv tovtcov Kcik- 
 
 Xhttov e<TTiv. — xP T H MaTia " riK l s > ' a * 
 TpiKrjs, 8lkt)S ; ttoKv 8ia(pepei, a> 
 2a)KpaTe<>, rj 8i<rj. lb. infr. : la- 
 rpiKT] yiyverai Trovrjpias rj 81KT). 
 
 The addition of KoXao-riKf) in 
 the present passage is, how- 
 ever, curious : for it is not 
 clear from what other kind of 
 justice corrective justice is 
 here distinguished. I there- 
 fore venture to suggest the 
 very slight correction 8ikt), 
 which is in some degree con- 
 
 firmed by the frequency of 
 tragic expressions in these 
 dialogues. Cf. Soph. Electr. 
 70 : aov yap ep\opai 8lktj Kaffap- 
 ttjs. Ant. 94 : e^dpa 8e t<5 6a- 
 vovri 7rp6<TKeio-ai 8lktj. And see 
 Phaidr. 278c: 8ikj] ttov -noir\- 
 ttjv — npoorepeis. Polit. 310 a: 
 em tovtois tovt' eivat, re^vrj (pdp- 
 pa<ov. Tim. 62 d: ovk ev 8lktj 
 86£ei to prjdeu TrpoarjKOV ovopa 
 
 \iyeiv. Thesetetus' answer, cos 
 yovv — 86gav, is in harmony 
 with this. It is not probable 
 that S/K77 is a marginal note, 
 since, except in the passage of 
 the Gorgias above quoted, the 
 term is hardly used with the 
 precise meaning given to Ko\a- 
 o-TiKT) here. The word is un- 
 accentuated in the Bocll. MS. 
 Compare the political appli- 
 cation of the idea of mdappos 
 already noticed in Legg. 5, 735 
 and Polit. 293. 
 
 9. rj TrXeia, 81/0 8e] Cf. Rep. 
 4, 445 C : airetpa 8e rrjs KaKias 
 (e'i8r)), rerrapa 8' ev avrols nVra 
 hv Ka\ a{-iov eTTip.VT]0-6r)i>ai. 
 
204>I2TH2. 
 
 229. 9EAI. Tlf,; 
 
 3*E. Tyu ayvoiav Xhovjts ti ttyj Kara fxeaou avrr)? 
 rofxrjv c')(ei riva. 8t7r\rj yap ai/Ti] ytyvop^vr) hifhov 
 otl Kal t-i]v StSao-KaAiKyv 8vo avayKa<^u popia tytiv, 
 cv e(f) iiA yevet twv avrrjs e/carepw. 
 
 But ignor- 
 ance, and 
 therefore 
 
 instruction 
 also, is two- 
 fold: the 
 more uu- 
 manage- 
 
 3. roprju e'xti riva] Cf. Legg. 
 12, 944 b: cr^efioi/ ovv ev 
 rols oveibeaiv e\ei riva ropfjv t) 
 rovrav twv 6vopdra>v eVi^opd. 
 pfycurms pev yap ovk iv iraatv 
 ovopd^oir av diKaicot, dnofiohevs 
 8e ott\(ov. 
 
 8ut\t} yap avTt) yiyvopevr) ] 
 Cf. Gorg. 464 b : Avolv ovtolv 
 toIv irpaypcLTotv 8vo \tya> re)(vas 
 K.r.X. 
 
 The meaning of pp. 226- 
 231 may be thus stated : The 
 Sophist professes to be an edu- 
 cator ; and the highest form 
 of education is that which 
 leads men to know them- 
 selves, and liberates them from 
 the conceit of knowledge : in 
 other words, the elenchus, or 
 cross-questioning method. This 
 
 Separation 
 1 
 
 is distinguished from the an- 
 tiquated mode of correction 
 by direct reproof, and also 
 from the positive instruction 
 which is given to those who 
 are consciously ignorant of any 
 subject. There is grave doubt 
 whether the Sophist deserves 
 to be called an educator in this 
 highest sense : but the honour 
 is yielded to him for the pre- 
 sent, with the feeling that he 
 will not retain it long. The 
 serious thought, that educa- 
 tion is the purification of the 
 mind through the separation 
 of the false from the true, is 
 approached ironically through 
 the trivial example of house- 
 hold processes, and also through 
 the following distinctions : 
 
 Of like from like 
 
 Of srood from evil = Purification 
 
 Corporeal Mental 
 
 (and mental evils are) 
 
 , /cTTacrts\ 
 
 novnpia I , I 
 
 \ voaos I 
 
 \aptTpiai 
 
 (iiKha pepr) dpa6ias") 
 
 TO /JLTJ KaTdOOTa 
 
 ,ti doKe'iv eldevai. 
 
 Hence instruction is 
 
 8i]ptovpyiKa\ 8i8ao-Ka\laL 
 
 7ratSet'a 
 
 vovdcnjriKrj eXey^c 
 
54 I1AATI2N02 
 
 ablekind 0EAI. TV ovv ; Karacjjave^ nj] aoi to vvv (i]Tov- p. --•>• 
 
 being stu- 
 pidity, or fievov ; 
 
 tliiit ignor- i— (T-i »a /?>»•? ' ' ^ ~ v \ 
 
 ancewhich All.. Ayycuay o oiw /xeyce tl julol ooko) koll y^aXe- c 
 
 tlie mind \ , , / * ~ 5<\ ~ v x > ~ 
 
 mistakes 7TOV a(pCOpi(Tp.€VOV OpUV 6LOOS, TTOLCTL TOLS ClXXoL? CLVTt]? 
 
 for know- > / /i / 
 
 ledge. 5 aVTLOTaUfXOV fiepeCTlV. 
 
 0EIA. IIokw &J; 
 
 HE. To /u?) KareiSoTa tl 8oKc-iv eldevai' oY ou 
 KLvdvvevti TrdvTa oaa diavola a<paXXop.e0a ylyveadai 
 ttolctlv. 
 io 0EAI. 'AA^. 
 
 HE. Kal Srj /cat rovTcp ye olp.ai fxovco rip ayvolas 
 afiaOla TOvvop.a TrpoaprjOrjvai. 
 
 0EAI. Udvv ye. 
 
 3?E. T/ 5e £7} rw 777? BiSao-KaXiKrjs apa fiepei tco 
 i^tovto airaWaTTOVTi XeKTeov ; cl 
 
 0EAI. Qifiou fxev ovv, co £eve, ro /xeV aAAo <5>7/.u- 
 
 3. 'Ayvoias §' ow] Badham : norance, Phil. 48 cl, e ; Legg. 9, 
 
 " 'Ayvolas y ovv legendum : est 86od; 863 c; 10,886 b; Symp. 
 
 enim responsio aliqua ex parte I.e.; Phsedr. 275 b. Ale. 118 a: 
 
 assentientis." So also the old avTr) ap f) ayvoia tcov kokcov ah [a 
 
 editions. The words as they teal f] enoveidto-Tos dpadia. 
 stand certainly take no account SV ov navra — iracriv] Because 
 
 of the question, but continue men never act without think - 
 
 the previous speech. ing they know. 
 
 5. dvTicrTadfxov] " Which may 8. ndvra oaa acpaXKopeda = 
 
 be weighed against all the Trdvra ra yiyvopeva fjplv acpdX- 
 
 other parts of ignorance put para. Cf. supr. 226 e: oaa — 
 
 together." The word belongs Kadalperai, and note. 
 
 to tragedy. Cf. Soph. El. 561 : 11. pova] Badham conjectures 
 
 cos — avTiaradpov tov Brjpos eV poplco, but pova has more point. 
 
 Bvo-eie ttjv avTov Koprjv. For " This alone earns the title of 
 xaXenov = difficult to handle, stupidity." Cf. Symp. 222 a: 
 
 cf. Symp. 204 a : avro yap vovv e^ovras — povovs tcov Xoycov. 
 tovto \a\en6v itrnv rj dpadia. I 4. Ti — XeKTeov] Sc. ovopa. 
 
 7. To pfj KareiSora tl SoKeiv 16. to pev dXXo — 8i8aaKaXias] 
 
 elftevai ] See, amongst other " The part which is separated 
 
 places where the ignorant from this includes instruction 
 
 conceit of knowledge is dis- in various handicrafts." A simi- 
 
 tinguished from conscious ig- lar division is made in Phileb. 
 
20<I>I2TH2. 
 
 55 
 
 p. 229. ovpytna? 8i8aaKaAla9, tovto 8e tvOdde ye iraifciav 81 
 y/jLCOU K€K\rj<j6ai. 
 
 HE. Kai yap o-ye8ov, co 0ea/r>;re, Iv TraaivKX- 
 Arjiriv. aAAa ya^o iip.lv en kou tovto aKeirTeov, el 
 aTopLOv rjbrj eort 7ray, rj two. tyov 8iaipecriv a£iav 5 
 hritivvixias. 
 
 0EAI. Oukow ^77 CTKOTreiv. 
 
 HE. Ao/Cet TOiVVV p.01 KOU TOVTO 6TL 7TY) a")(i^€a'$(U. 
 
 0EAI. Karar/; 
 
 HE. T779 eV rot? Aoyoiy 8i8ao-Ka\u<r}? r) /xeV r/)a- 10 
 e xyTt'pa tl? eoiKev 6809 eivai, to 8* erepou avrrjs /jlo- 
 pLov XetoTepov. 
 
 0EAI. To irolov 8r) tovtcov €Ka.T€pop Aeycop.€i> ; 
 HE. To pjev apxaioirpeires tl iraTpiov, a> npos 1 
 
 The ari 
 which 
 removes 
 tliis has the 
 peculiarly 
 ( in* k 
 name of 
 
 IlatSfia — 
 
 Education. 
 
 55 C : ovkovv rjfxiv to pev — * 8tj- 
 piovpyiKov to~Ti ttJS nep\ to. padi]- 
 pctTa eTno~Ti]nrjs, to 8e nepl nai- 
 8eiav m\ Tpo<pi)v ; Cf. also Protag. 
 322 b, where 8rjpiovpyiKr] is op- 
 posed tO 7T0\lTlKT). 
 
 1. Traibeiav] The idea of 
 education in the higher sense 
 is due to Greek philosophy : 
 appearing first in the saying- 
 attributed to several of the 
 early thinkers, noXvpadiri voov 
 
 ov 8i8darKe(. 
 
 6Y rjpSiv] " By our means." 
 I. e. The use of the word by 
 the Athenians has given it 
 currency throughout this part 
 of Greece : " a nobis (Athe- 
 niensibus) noniinis hujus auc- 
 toribus." — Heindorf. ' 
 
 5. nav] Cf. Parmen. Fr. 6 1 : 
 
 ov "nor erjv oi>8 earai, e7rei vvv 
 i'ariv opov nav, €i> £vve)(es. I. e. 
 whether we have reached the 
 
 liTprjTov ei'Soj. 
 
 8. KCli TOVTO €TL 771] (T\l^((T0ai] 
 
 " This, like the rest, admits 
 of being divided somewhere." 
 The words kcu tovto '4tl are in 
 exact keeping with fj8rj wdv 
 supr. Cf. supr. 222c. Hermann's 
 conjecture, koto, tovto, is un- 
 necessaiy and awkward, be- 
 cause anticipating the ques- 
 tion, and because tovto has 
 no antecedent. 
 
 IO. Tijs — StSacr/caXtK^y] Traideia 
 is assumed to be equivalent to 
 
 rj ei> toIs \6yois 8t8a<TKa\iKr]. 
 
 r) pev — 686s] Cf. Aristoph. 
 Ran. sub. init. 
 
 13. Xeyapev] Stallb. Aeyo/xej/, 
 from Sn. i : perhaps rightly. 
 
 14. To pev — o-TeWovTui] " The 
 
 one a time-honoured ancestral 
 mode, which men used chiefly 
 towards their sons, and many 
 still do so when they see them 
 fallen into some error, either 
 speaking roughly to them, or 
 else more softly expostulating : 
 which varieties may be cor- 
 
56 
 
 IJAATQNOS 
 
 Of which tovs vius fxaXuTT t\p(ovTo re kou en rroAXol y^piovTai p. 229 
 
 there arc \ -, r / » ~ , •. r , \ \ 
 
 twomodea Ta vvv i in( *- v avTOis ^ajxapTavcdat tl, to, peu %aXe- P- 2 . : 5° 
 
 recognized: > \ o>\ \ n ' n ' v 
 
 the old- irouvovTes, ra oe pLaXdaKoiTepm 7ra.pafivUovpi.evoL' to 
 
 fashioned £> 9 y ' » v > a ' ■>' * n 
 
 admonitory ° ovu CVpCTTav aVTO OpOOTaTa €L7TOL TL9 av VOVOtTr)- 
 
 system ' 
 
 of moral $TIKI)V. 
 
 5R?' 9EAI. "Ee™ otrm. 
 
 rectly included in the general 
 name of admonition." 
 
 " True." 
 
 " Now for the other method. 
 It would seem that some had 
 reflected with themselves that 
 stupidity is always involun- 
 tary, and that no one who 
 thinks himself wise will ever 
 care to be a learner of those 
 matters in which he fancies 
 himself to be accomplished : 
 moreover, that education in 
 the form of admonition spends 
 a world of labour with but 
 small result." 
 
 " And they were right." 
 
 " Therefore they address 
 themselves differently to the 
 task of exorcising this con- 
 ceit." 
 
 The two modes of correc- 
 tion may be compared with 
 the two kinds of legislation 
 (with and without explanation 
 and persuasion) mentioned in 
 the Laws, of which the former 
 is there preferred : see esp. 
 Legg. 4, 720 sqq. So far was 
 Plato from reversing his judg- 
 ment, as Mr. Grote (vol. iii. p. 
 355, note on p. 354) supposes, 
 respecting the vovderr/Tiicov el8os 
 rrjs iraiSeias, which Protagoras 
 advocates, Prot. 3 2 5 d : nai eav 
 
 fxev 4ko>v TreldrjTai, — el 8e p,rj, 
 wo-nep £u\ov 8ieo-Tpapp.evov Kal 
 
 xapTTTopevov evdvvovariv aTreiXais 
 Ka\ TrXrjynls. 
 
 (14.) ap^aion penes tl ndrptou] 
 
 A tragic expression; cf. Aesch. 
 
 Prom. 409 : peyako<TXT)pova T iip- 
 
 xaioirpi-irri — rlpav, where two ad- 
 jectives are similarly combined. 
 
 2. orav avTols] Cf. Rep. I, 
 343 a : os ye airy ovts npo- 
 ftciTa ovre rroipe'va yiyixocnceis. 
 
 7. T6 8e ye] The Bodleian, 
 in common with most of the 
 MSS., omits (os (before e'i^am), 
 which is not necessary, and if 
 inserted will hardly affect 
 
 the sense, for cos e'lgaaiv rjyr)- 
 crao-Qai is equivalent to ^yrj- 
 (TavTO, cos e'i£a(Ti. Cf. infr. 263 d: 
 as eoiice — yiyvearBai, and note. 
 
 The introduction of a sentence 
 with to 8e out of construction, 
 or rather in apposition, is very 
 frequent in Plato, and scarcely 
 needs illustration. Compare, 
 however, Polit. 263 c : to 8e 
 ye, o> ttclvtcov dv8peLOTa.Te, Ta.% 
 av, e'l ttov (ppovipov etrri tl £a>ov 
 eTepov, oiov 8oKe7 to tcov ye- 
 pdvcov, rj tl tolovtov ciWo, Kara 
 TavTa iacos 8iovop.d£oi. If cos 
 
 is retained, which is perhaps 
 better on the whole, as e'L^ao-l 
 Tives riyrjaao-daL k.t. A. IS equi- 
 valent to rjyTjo-apevoi Tives, cos 
 ei£ao~i — o~TeX\ovTCii. 
 
 Xoyov eavTols 86vres] " On re- 
 flection." Cf. Hdt. I.34: 'o 8' 
 
5()<I>I2TH2. 
 
 p. 230. 86i>T€? I'lyrjaacrOoLL irairav ukovitlov up.a0lai> etVat, kcil 
 fiaOeiv ouSeis ttot av iOeXeiu tov olofievov tlvai 
 
 O~0(J)0V TOVTCOV Q)V OLOLTO TTtpl SetVO? elvai, /X€TCX 8t 
 
 noXXov ttovou to vov0€ty)tikov ettW rrj? nut^eta? 
 tr/jLiKpou avvreiv. \ 
 
 0EAI. 'QpOcos: ye vopl^ovTe?. 
 
 HE. TS tol tolvti]? rr/s Soljrjs eiri ei<(3oXr)v aXXco 
 b TpOTTCd (TTeXXouTat. 
 
 0EAI. T/w S77 ; 
 
 SE. AiepcoTaHTiv <£>v av otrjTal rU tl irept XeyeLV 
 Xeycov prjSev' dff are 7rXav(o/JLevcov tols Soija? paStco? 
 €$J€Ta{pvo-i, kcu crvvdyovTes 8rj rois Xoyois els Tavrov 
 TiOeaat Trap aAA^Aay, tl0€vt€? Se iTribeLKvvovaiv 
 auras avTols afia wepl tcov avTcov npbs tol aura 
 
 tlms de- 
 scribed. 
 
 that do 
 man h i >hea 
 
 pid, and 
 that the 
 
 source of 
 error lies 
 in the con- 
 ceit of 
 
 wivl'Mn : 
 
 too, thai 
 the old me- 
 thod was 
 
 lal.nr'i.H!,, 
 and had 
 small 
 result, 
 there are 
 some who 
 address 
 themselves 
 differently 
 to the task 
 
 (Trei8fj i^ytpBrj Kcii \6yov eavrco 
 c8ookc, KaToppoo8r)(ras tov oveipov 
 ayerat ra ttcu8\ yvvaiKa. Soph. 
 OEd. Eex. 583 : Ovk, el 8i8oirjs 
 y , cos cyoo, (ravrco \6yov. 
 
 2. oi8ev ttot av idckeiv] So 
 
 Bodl. Alii., Stallbaum. Edd. 
 Vet. oiSeVore. It desei'ves 
 mention that Heindorf had 
 at one time been led to con- 
 jecture oiBev, because of tov- 
 tcov following, but had after- 
 wards contented himself with 
 making tovtcov depend on 
 nipt, 
 
 3. ao<p6v — cWos] Plato iro- 
 nically uses the words as syno- 
 nymous. Cf. Theset. 173 b: 
 
 8eivoi re Kai cro0oi yeyovorcs, wf 
 o'iovtcu. lb. 177 a : Ka * p elnoopev 
 on, civ prj aTTaWaytocri ttjs 8ci- 
 VOT7JTOS k.t.X. 
 
 fXCTCl 8e 7ToXXou TToVov] This 
 
 is the same lesson which 
 experience has taught to 
 schoolmasters and others with- 
 
 in our own memory. But few 
 of them have found so good 
 a substitute for the old- 
 fashioned vov6eT7]TiKrj as the 
 Socratic elenchus. 
 
 7. Too toc] Cf. Theset. 179 
 
 d : Top toi — paK\ov CTKCTTTCOV. 
 
 8. (ttcWovtcu ] " Address 
 themselves." SrfXXecr&u is si- 
 milarly used in Legg. 10, 892 : 
 
 oxikovv to. pcTa Tavra eVr' avTo 8rj 
 tovto o-TcWcopcda ; lb 893 b, 
 
 Phileb. 50 e. 
 
 10. AiepcoTcoaiv yri tovtcov) 
 nepl cov civ tls o'irjTai ti \cyeiv. 
 
 11. TrXavoopevoov] Hc.toov uvBpoo- 
 
 7T00V. Cf. I Aldb. 117a: TTCpi 
 
 toov diKaioov Kal adiKoov arroKpivo- 
 
 pevos (figs TrXavacrdai ; eha ov 
 8Fj\ov oti 81a. to pf] cl8evai nepl 
 avrcbv, 81a. tcivtci nXava ; Lys. 
 214 a. 
 
 14. Tvep\ toov cwtoov k.t.X.] Cf. 
 
 Rep. 4, 436 e : cos ttotc ti to 
 
 civto ov cipa Kara to civto irpbs to 
 avTo TclvavTia ttciQol. 
 
58 
 
 riAATONOS 
 
 of getting 
 rid of this 
 conceit. 
 
 Cross-ques- 
 tioning 
 men on 
 points of 
 which they 
 are assured, 
 they drive 
 them into 
 contradic- 
 
 kclto. ravra evavrias. oi 5' opwvTts eavrol? fxtv p. 230. 
 XakeTraivovai, irpos 8e tovs aXXovs ^p-epovvrai, Kai 
 tovtco Si) tco Tpoircd rQ>v irepi avrovs fieyaXcov KOI 
 aKkrjpcdv doijcov airaXXarTOVTai iracrwv re dwaXXa- c 
 5 ycou (xkov€lu [re] rjdlaTTju Kai rw iravyovri fiefiaioTara 
 yLyvojievrju. vofii^ovTes yap, co iral c/u'Ae, oi Kadal- 
 
 1. 6pS>vTes~\ Sc. to (TriSeiKvvo- 
 fxevov. 
 
 eavrols /.lev xaXeTraivovai] Cf. 
 Theffit. 168 a : eavrovs aiTid- 
 
 (TOVTai K.T.X. 
 
 2. TTpos 8e tovs aXXovs rjp.] 
 Cf, Thetet. 2IO: tjttov eaei ftapvs 
 roiy (Tvvovo-i Kai fjpepaiTfpos, o~a>- 
 (ppovcos ovk olopevos el8evai 6 prj 
 olada. 
 
 3. tcdv irepl avrovs] " Which 
 
 encompass them." The same 
 expression might be used of a 
 disease, or of unwholesome hu- 
 mours. Perhaps avrovs should 
 be read. The Bodl. (ut ssepe) 
 has no breathing. 
 
 4. o-K\r]pS)v] " Stiff," " un- 
 bending," " unyielding." Cf. 
 Crat. 487 d : to (TKXrjpov re Kai 
 dp€Tao-Tpo(j)ov, o 8r) appaTOV Ka- 
 Xelrai. Charm. 175 d: ovrcas 
 fjpcov fvrjdiKwv Tvxovaa rj £rjT7]0~is 
 
 xai ov o-Kkrjpcbv. Theset. 155 e : 
 
 o~K\r)povs ye Xeyeis Kai uvtitvttovs 
 dudpcJonovs. 
 
 7rao~£)v re anaXXaycov ukovsiv 
 [Te]r)o'lo-Tr)v] TheVat.alone rejects 
 the second re. If this is fol- 
 lowed, the displacement of re 
 may be defended from Eep. 9, 
 572 a, Phsedr. 269 c. For the 
 cogn. accus., cf. Eep. 6, 496 e. 
 
 5. /3e/3aioYara yiyvopevqv] Cf. 
 
 Legg. 2, 663 e : KaXbv f) dXr)- 
 
 6(ia Kai p.6vtpov. 
 
 6. vop,l£ovT(s yap] The con- 
 struction of this sentence is 
 broken off by the introduction 
 
 and application of the simile, 
 as in Phileb. 58 c : 7/ 8' etnov 
 — etircopev. Kep. 3, 402 b, C 
 Theset. 197 c, alib. The idea 
 of voplfrvTes is then resumed in 
 the finite verb 8ievorj6r]o-av, and 
 the apodosis is postponed, or 
 rather is absorbed into the sub- 
 ordinate clause rrplvav tis — nXeia 
 8e pi). By a kind of attraction 
 the latter part of the sentence 
 follows the analogy of the &o-nep 
 clause. For clkovuv jjSiW^v, cf. 
 Apol. 23 c: oi veoi — avToparoi 
 Xa'ipovcnv aKovovres e^eTa^opevwv 
 tcov avdpioTvav. The regularity 
 of the sentence might be re- 
 stored thus : TavTbv 8iavorj0evTes 
 
 eKeivoi, — Karao~Tr]0~avTes, e^eXov- 
 
 Tes, Kadapov dne(pr)vav k.t.X. 
 
 " For such, dear youth, are the 
 thoughts of their purifiers. Just 
 as the physicians of the body 
 think (vevopLiKaa-i, frequentative 
 perfect) that a body cannot 
 profit by the food received, until 
 the obstructing matters are cast 
 forth, in like manner these 
 reason about the mind, that it 
 will never obtain benefit from 
 the learning which it receives, 
 until, by cross-examination, 
 the person cross-examined be 
 put to shame ; and a riddance 
 being made of the notions 
 which obstruct learning, the 
 man is purged, and thinks he 
 knows no more than what he 
 really knows." 
 
20*I2TH2. 
 
 59 
 
 p. 230. povTes avTou?, cocrirep 01 irep\ ru aco/xara larpul 
 
 VtVOpLLKOUTL fit) 7TpOT€pOV OLV TY}9 7TpOCT(f)€pop€U7]? Tpo- 
 
 (prj? airoXaveiv SuvaaOat crcopa, irpiv av tcl ep.7ro8l- 
 tbvTa ev avrco ris €/c/3aA?7, tovtov /cat 7rept ~^/v\i]9 
 $L€voi]6r)crai> e/cetVot, per) npoTepov avTiqv t^iv tcov 
 
 d irpoaCiSepopevcov paQipxcvrcov ovrjatv, irp\v av eXeyyow 
 Tis tov eXey^optevov el? a\(jyyvr\v Karaarrjaa?, ras" 
 toI<s paOrjpacriv epL7rodiov? Sofja? efjc-Xcov, KaOapov 
 a7ro(j)->]i/r) /cat ravTa rjyovpLevov, airep oldev, eidevai 
 ptova, 7rAe/a) 8e pr\. 
 
 GEAI. BeAr/an? yovv kcu aco^povearaTq tcov 
 e'tjecov avrrj. 
 
 3?E. Aid Tama Srj Tvavra rjpuv, co QeaLTme, /cat 
 rov eheyxpv XeKTeov ebs apa peylaTrj kcu KvpLcoTa.Tr) 
 tcov KaOapaecov ecrTL, kcu tov dveXeyKTOv av vopi- 
 (TTeov, av /cat Tvyyavr) fiaaiXev? 6 p.kyas cov, to. 
 
 e peyicrTa aKaOapTOV bvTa, airaibevTov re /cat alcr^pov 
 yeyovevac Tama, a KaOapcoTaTov /cat kccXXicttov 
 67rpe7re tov ovtco? iaopevov ev8aip.ova elvat. 
 
 6. 7rpoa(pepojjL(vcov'\ The verb 
 irpoartpipeiv is more often applied 
 to physic than to diet (Thucyd. 
 II. 51, Plato Charm. 157 c, 
 Phsedr. 270 b), but is conve- 
 nient here as equally applicable 
 to food and instruction. Cf. 
 Legg. 7, 809 e : trorepov fls dxpi- 
 /3eiai' rov padi'iparos Ireov — 77 to 
 wapdnav cwSe irpoo-oicrTeov. 
 
 13 — 15. Kal Kal] " Not 
 
 only — but." 
 
 15. tov dveXeynTOv] Cf. Apol. 
 38 a: 6 dvegeracrTOS fiios ov /3tco- 
 tos dvdpanrco. 
 
 1 6. av Kal (3ao-t\ei>s 6 peyas i]] 
 
 Compare Theset. 175 c: v & a - 
 
 o-i\evs evbaipav. Lys. 2 09 e : 
 JJpos Ai'or, tjv 6° eya>, t'i cipa 6 
 p.iyas j3acn\evs; k.t.X. Euthyd. 
 274 a: MaKap('£o) ap vpds eycoye 
 
 TOV KTTjpaTOS 7ro\l> pdXXov 77 /Xf- 
 
 yav j3ao~i\ea ttjs ap^r;?. And for 
 
 ra peyio-Ta, in which there is 
 perhaps a slight allusion to 
 the greater mysteries, cf. Rep. 
 
 6,504 a : TTola S>) Xeyeis pa6r]paTa 
 peyictTa k.t.X. Polit. 301 a. 
 
 17. dnalbevTov re Kal alo~xpov] 
 
 Since it was proved that dpa- 
 6ia, of which education is the 
 remedy, is a kind of alaxos. 
 Supr. 228 d. 
 
 1 9. eirpene} Sc. yeyovevai. 
 
 per 
 ceii ing 
 « bieh, the 
 
 angry with 
 
 tin in 
 and I' -- 
 disposed 
 to be con- 
 tentious 
 towards 
 othi 1 , 
 In this 
 way tliey 
 are most 
 surely re- 
 lieved by 
 an opera- 
 tion, which 
 it is de- 
 lightful 
 to witness, 
 of the 
 stubborn 
 tumors of 
 self-con- 
 ceit. For 
 - mental, 
 like bodily 
 food, can 
 do no good 
 to the sick 
 man, until 
 the noxious 
 obstruc- 
 tions of 
 vanity are 
 
()•() 
 
 IIAAT12N02 
 
 removed, 
 
 and ;i 
 
 w lii>U'snnie 
 state of in- 
 i llcctual 
 humility 
 has been 
 restored. 
 Thus refu- 
 tation is 
 the great- 
 est of all 
 purgations: 
 and even 
 the Great 
 King, if he 
 has not 
 undergone 
 this test, is 
 uneducated 
 and there- 
 fore un- 
 happy. 
 
 0EAI. l\avTa.Trao-L ptv ovv. p. 230 
 
 HE. T/ 84 ; tovs; TavTr) yjpcojiivovs rrj re^vrj 
 rivets (f)/]ao/jL€i> ; iyco fxev yap (j)o(3ovpai cro(pi<TTas p. 231 
 (f)ai>ai. 
 5 0EAI. T/AJ; 
 
 HE. M?) fxutpv avrots TrpocraTTTwiiev ytpas. 
 
 0EAI. 'AAAa firju irpocreoLKe tolovtco tlvl tol vvv 
 elprjfieva. 
 
 HE. Kal yap Kvvl Xvko?, aypK^rarov rj/jLepcoraTU). 
 
 orov 8e aa(J)a\rj Set ttclvtcdv pLaXiara irepl ras 6/jloio- 
 
 Ti]Tas del TTOLeiaOat tttjv (j)vXaKiqv' 6\i(T0r)poTaTOi> 
 
 6. avrols] Sc. rois (rocpi- 
 
 (TTClTs. 
 
 7. roiovra tiv\ to. vvv elprjpevaj 
 " The modes of action which 
 have been described (e. g. the 
 art of controversy) bear some 
 resemblance to this purifying 
 method of education." 
 
 9. Kal yap kvv\ \vkos] Mr. 
 
 Grote remarks on this, that 
 Plato would have objected to 
 the wolf being placed in the 
 same genus with the dog. He 
 would certainly have objected 
 to class them together as 'tame' 
 or ' wild.' But he here recog- 
 nizes the likeness between 
 them, on which, had it suited 
 his purpose, he might have 
 dwelt to the exclusion of the 
 difference. This illustrates the 
 unfixed and provisional nature 
 of Plato's classification, but 
 nothing more. Cf. Rep. 5, 
 454 b, where it is shewn that 
 differences are no less treacher- 
 ous than resemblances, except 
 to those who are able ko.t ei'S?7 
 (Tvvdyeiv kcl\ Siaipelcrdai. 
 
 io, t6v 8e d<T<pa\r)~\ The heed- 
 
 ful cautious man — the cha- 
 racter described in Soph. (Ed. 
 Rex. 616 as 6 ev\a(Bovpfvos 
 ireaeiv. 
 
 ivepl ras 6poioTr)Tas] These 
 words recal Euclides' objection 
 to the argument from ana- 
 logy. Diog. Laert. II. 107 : 
 
 Kal tou 81a Trapafiokrjs \6yov 
 dvypei, ~keya>v rjroi if; opoloov av- 
 tov fj e£ dvopoicov avvl(TTaa-6ai' 
 Kai ei [lev e'£ Spolav, wepi avrd 
 8elv paXKov r) ols opold earcv dva- 
 arpecpeadai, et 8e e£ dvopoioov, nap- 
 ekneiv tt/v napddea-iv. Cf. Phsedr. 
 262 b, c, 273 d. Ar. Eth. Nic. 
 VI. 3, 2 : et Set aKpifioXoyel- 
 uQai Kal prj dicoXovdelv reus opoi- 
 
 oTrjcnv. But Euclides dwelt 
 merely on the logical weak- 
 ness of comparisons: Plato 
 here speaks practically of the 
 danger which attends their 
 use. Compare the consciousness 
 of modern times on the same 
 point, Avhich some one has ex- 
 pressed by saying that Analogy 
 is like a broken reed, good to 
 point with but not to lean 
 upon. 
 
2C)<M2TH2. 
 
 61 
 
 p. 231. yap to yevos. opcos 8e eaTcoaau' ov yap nepl 
 arpiKpcov opoav ri^v dp.(f)io-(3i']Tr]aiu otopat ytvqataQaL 
 b Tore oirorav 'tKavois ([wXaTTcocnv. 
 0EA1. Ovkovv to ye et/coy. 
 
 S?E. "Rctto) 8rj diaKpiTiKrj? Ttyy i]s KaOapTiKrj, KaO- ; 
 apTiKrjs 8e to nepl ^rv\r]v pepos d(j)ct)pLa0o}, tovtov 
 8e 8i8ao-KaAiKr), 8i8ao~Ka\iKrjs 8e 7rai8€VTLKr}' tyjs 8e 
 7rai8evTLKrj9 6 irep\ tt]v ptaTaiov 8o^oao(f)lav yiyvo- 
 p,evos kXeyyps eV ra vvv Xoyw 7rapa(pai>€VTi p.r)8ev 
 aXK rjpuv elvai Xeyea0a> TrXrjv rj ye'wi yevvaia ao(j)L- 1 
 
 OTlKq. 
 
 0EAI. AeyeaOco puiv' airopco 8e eycoye rj8r) 81a. 
 
 e to 7roXXa 7T€(f)ai'dai i tl ^prj iroTe cos dXrjOrj Xeyovra 
 
 Ka) 8uo-yypi(ppevov ear eat ovt&s elvai tov ao<pLaTrji>. 
 
 HE. Elkotgos ye crv diropwv. dXXd tol KaKtivov 
 
 rjyeicrOaL XPV vvv rj8rj a(j)68pa diropelv oirrj ttotc en 
 
 But by 
 
 shall the 
 111:1 rter "i" 
 
 called ' 
 
 The fun.- 
 t ions as- 
 signed bo 
 the Sophial 
 bear some 
 relation to 
 this. And 
 yet he 
 seems 
 scarce 
 worthy of 
 so high a 
 
 ' dignity. 
 Analogies 
 aresHppery 
 ground. 
 The savage 
 wolf wears 
 some re- 
 semhlance 
 to the gen- 
 
 . tie dog. 
 
 ' Let us, 
 however, 
 grant him 
 
 I. Eoraow] Sc. aocpurrai ol 
 
 Taxirrj -^pwfievot. rfj re^vrj. Cf. 
 ovtoi fxev yap, el 
 
 Men. 92 d 
 
 <tv j3ov\ei, earaxrav ol ao<pio~TaL. 
 ov yap Trcpl arpiKpav opwv\ 
 
 " When they begin thoroughly 
 to guard their confines, the 
 contest will be for no trifling 
 boundary." I. e. The difference 
 is great. The name is granted 
 to them provisionally, with the 
 warning that they may have to 
 defend their title hereafter 
 against the rightful owner. Cf. 
 Phileb. 56 d : ou o-piKpos Spos. 
 Legg. 11, 916 e: q peLfrvs v 
 
 e'Xarrous opovs del Set diaaacpelv. 
 
 Note the false echo in (pvXaicrjv 
 
 — (pvXaTTCocriv. 
 
 8. 8ogoo-o<plav] The word oc- 
 curs in Phileb. 49 a, d, and the 
 adj. 8o£6o-oqbos in Phsedr. 275 b. 
 
 9. napatpavevri] " which has 
 
 appeared by a side wind, out 
 of due course." This inquiry 
 did not arise directly out of 
 the preceding : supr. 226, a, b. 
 Cf. The?et. 199 c: detvorepov 
 p.ei>Toi Trados ak\o TrapaCpaivecrdat, 
 
 ptoi SoKet. Nvv is to be taken, 
 i/7rfp/3aro)r, with the participle. 
 
 IO. rj yevei yevvaia cro<£.] Cf. 
 
 Soph. (Ed. Kex. 1469 : iff & 
 yovfi yewah. Compare the tragic 
 grandiloquence of Pep. 5, 454 a : 
 
 f] yevvaia tj 8uvap.is /c.r.X. It is not 
 
 meant to distinguish the So- 
 phist " of a noble stamp" from 
 the " degenerate variety." 
 
 13. its a\r]6fj Xeyovra] "What 
 
 definition of the Sophist one may 
 assert with entire confidence." 
 16. dnopelv] There is an allu- 
 sion to the literal meaning = 
 avev nopov, " having no passage 
 for escape." 
 
6 ( 2 
 
 nAATQNOS 
 
 tliis pro- 
 visionally, 
 
 l'..ivsi'1'iny 
 that he 
 will have 
 to fight 
 hard here- 
 after for 
 his claim. 
 We are em- 
 barrassed 
 with the 
 number of 
 our defini- 
 tions ; the 
 only com- 
 fort is that 
 the So- 
 phist's 
 
 merit must 
 be still 
 greater. 
 We have 
 surrounded 
 him : let us 
 now close 
 in upon 
 him. We 
 have had 
 glimpses of 
 him as a 
 
 8iadvcr€Tai tov XoyoV opOij yap r/ irapoipla, to tois p. 231 
 airaaas p.i] padiov elvai hiafyevyeiv . vvv ovv koll 
 pLaXiara ewiOeTeov avTcp. 
 
 SEAL KaXcos Xeyeis. 
 5 AE. YlpcoTOv 67; (TTavrts oiov e^avairvevacopev, 
 /cat irpos i)pas avrovs StaXoyicrcDpLeOa apa avairavo- 
 pLevoi, — (f)€pe, oirocra ypuv 6 ao(piaT7]9 7re<fiavTai. Sokco 
 p.ev yap, to irpwTov evpeOrj vecov /ecu TrXovaiccv ep,- d 
 pLicrdos Orjpevrys. 
 co 0EAI. N«. 
 
 SE. To 8e ye SevTepov epiropos tls irepi tcl 7779 
 yjrv)(f}$ fxaOyfiara. 
 
 0EAI. YIdvv ye. 
 
 SE. Tpirov 8e apa ov 7repi ravra ravra KamqXos 
 [5 avefyavr] ; 
 
 0EAI. Na/. Ka\ reraprov ye avT07rcoXr)9 7repl ra 
 pLaOrjpara -qpuv. 
 
 1. ras airdaas] Heindorf 
 supplies Xaftds, comparing Phi- 
 leb. 13 d: dvievcu is rds opolas. 
 But the word 8ia<pevyecv, and 
 the whole context, rather sug- 
 gest the metaphor of a chase. 
 Some such word as oppas, or 
 7T€ipas, would therefore supply 
 the meaning better. 
 
 2. Ka\] " Now therefore is 
 the very time of all others to 
 set upon him." /cat gives an 
 emphasis to the clause in op- 
 position to the previous doubt. 
 Similar idiomatic uses of ko.1 
 are Symp. 177b: tovto p.ev 
 
 rjTTov leal Bavpacrrov. Legg. 6, 
 752 d : ras pev ovv akXas xal 
 ftpaxvTepov epyov. 
 
 5. o-Tavres] Like men who 
 have been stooping and press- 
 ing forwards. 
 
 egavairv.] eg seems to im- 
 ply turning aside from the 
 pursuit ('standing out,' Shak- 
 speare) for a breathing while. 
 Compare igavurrdvai. 
 
 7. (pipe, oirocra] (pipe, like 
 
 dpeXei, has become a sort of 
 particle, and is retained in the 
 indirect form. Cf. Theset. 
 190 b : otl Travros paXXov to 
 tol KaXov alaxpdv. Tb. C cos nav- 
 TdnacTiv apa k.t.~S. 
 
 8ok5) pev yap] 8okco is here 
 used parenthetically, like 0U1 
 in Theset. 147 a. For pev, cf. 
 supr. 230 e, alib. 
 
 11. tcl rrjs yfn>XV s F% flra ] 
 A pleonastic expression, sug- 
 gested by the analogy of r) tov 
 
 aapaTos rpocprj. Vid. SUpr. 
 
 224 a. 
 
 17. rjp.lv] Heindorf added rjv 
 
2CXM2TH2. 
 
 63 
 
 o. %$i. SE. 'Op0a>? e/JLvrj/jLovevaa?. Tre/mrou <5' eyo) 7T(l- 
 o pa.o~op.aL pvrjpoveveiv rrj? yap ayoL>VL(JTiKi)S 7rep\ 
 Aoyous tjv tis adXi-jTrj^, tijv epi<TTiK>]i> rlyvrjv dcjjcopt- 
 apevos. 
 
 0EAI. H^ yap ovv. 5 
 
 HE. To ye fjLTjV Iktov apL^La^rrjaipov p.ev, o/xeo? 
 8* edeptev avrco avyxwp/jo-avTe? 8o^cov €/x7ro<5tW p.a- 
 Orjfxacn TrepL y^rv\i]v KaOapTr/v avrov elvat. 
 GEAI. WavTairaai p.ev o\)V. 
 2 3 2 " SE. 'Ap ovv evvoeis, orav hno'Trjp.wv tis ttoWcdv™ 
 (f)aii>r/Tai, puas 8e T€)(yr)$ bvo\xari irpocrayopevrjTai, to 
 
 I I -in. in. 
 
 :i merchant - 
 
 a :-ll"|' 
 
 keeper, a 
 manufac- 
 turer, :i 
 mental 
 athl( fce, 
 
 from conjecture. But rjy.lv may 
 depend on the verbal meaning 
 
 of avTOTva>\r)s nepl to. fiadijfiara. 
 
 " One who sells us learned 
 wares of his own manufac- 
 ture." 
 
 2. rrjs dycoviOTLKris Trepl \6yovs 
 
 dflXq-Tjy] rrjs dy. is partitive; 
 and 7repi \6yovs is to be joined 
 with ddXrjTTjs. " Under the 
 head of contention he appeared 
 as a champion in argument." 
 
 3. d<pcopio-pevos] " Having ap- 
 propriated to himself." Perf. 
 pass, with middle signification. 
 Of. infr. 268 sub fin. : rrjs 71-0177- 
 <re<os dcpwpLapevov iv \6yois to 
 6avp.aroTvouK.6v popiov. 
 
 6. To (ktov is nominative 
 
 to dpa^io-^rjTrjo-Lpov rjv, but must 
 
 be again supplied as the ad- 
 verbial accusative Avith Wepev 
 — eivai, like to 7rpS)Tov evpeOr) 
 above. " His sixth character 
 was open to dispute, but still 
 we so far yielded to his claim 
 that we described him, sixthly, 
 as a purger of conceits which 
 obstruct learning in the region 
 of the mind." 
 
 7. paOwao-i] The Bodl. MS., 
 
 with A. EL, has padrjcnv. 
 
 10. 'Ap ovv evvoeis — npoaayo- 
 
 pevei] " Do you perceive, then, 
 that when one who receives 
 his name from a single art 
 seems to command various pro- 
 vinces, this appearance is not 
 to be trusted, but whoever 
 has such an impression of any 
 science is clearly unable to dis- 
 cern that point of it wherein 
 these various parts of know- 
 ledge meet, whence he gives 
 many names instead of one to 
 the man who knows them." 
 
 We have had various glimpses 
 of the Sophist, but have no- 
 where been able to get a clear 
 view of him. Why is this 'I 
 Because we have not yet seized 
 the leading principle of his art, 
 if indeed there be a leading 
 principle. When we remem- 
 ber that tmreality is afterwards 
 proved to be the Sophist's 
 principle, the irony of the 
 present passage becomes ma- 
 nifest. 
 
 11. to (pdvTaapa roGro] Cf. 
 
64 
 
 1IAATQNQ2 
 
 But we are 
 still to seek 
 for a clear 
 and con- 
 sistent 
 view. 
 
 Lb. 
 
 Transition 
 
 toil. 
 
 The notion 
 of contro- 
 versy 
 seemed to 
 approach 
 most nearly 
 to him. 
 Suppose 
 we follow 
 him upon 
 this track. 
 
 (f)d^Ta(T/j.a tovto w? ovk eaff vyies, dXXa SrjXov coy 
 6 Tvdo-yuiv avrb 7rpo? riva re^yqv ov hvvarai Karihfiv 
 tKtivo olvti]9, els o iravTa tol pa6i]prxTrx ravra (3Xi7rei, 
 Sio Kai 7roXXoi? ovofiacnv dvff eVoy rov typvTa avrd 
 5 7rpoaayopev€L ; 
 
 0EAI. KivSvvevet tovto TavTrj tty] /idXiaTa ir€(j)v- 
 Kevai. 
 
 SE. Mr) to'lvvv r)fxei9 ye amo ev Trj (rjTrjaei 8i 
 
 dpyiav Traa^co/uLev, dXX' 6.vaXa^(Ofxev irpwTOV twv 
 
 lowepl top aofyio-Trjv elpr/pLevcov. ev yap ti llol LiaXiaTa 
 
 KCLT€(f)dl>r) OVTOV LLTjVVOV. 
 
 0EAI. To ttoIov ; 
 
 HE. 'AvriXoyiKOV olvtov efyaiiev eivai ttov. 
 
 0EAI. No/. 
 15 HE. TV 6" ; ov kol tcov aXXcov avTOv tovtov 
 bi^daKaXov ylyvecrOai ; 
 
 0EAI. Tlfirjv; 
 
 HE. ^K07ra>pL€P Sr) 7rep\ t'lvo<s apa Kai abaalv ol 
 tolovtol iroieiv dvTiXoyiKovs ■. r) Se o-Keyjfis tjliiv e£ 
 
 p. 232. 
 b 
 
 Phileb. 57 C : ev tovtois 8e dp" 
 ov Tiva rkyvi]v ms opwvvpov 
 (pdey£dpevos, els 86£av KaTao-rrjcras 
 as fJLias, TraXiv cos 8vo1v enavepara 
 Tovrotv avrolv K.T.X. 
 
 2. 6 Tvao-^av avrb rrpos Tivaj 
 I. e. to (paiverai to toiovto ivepi 
 nvos Texvrjs. Cf. Ar. Pol. IV. 7. 
 
 5. 7rpoo~ayopeiei] Sc. 6 Trdo-^oiv 
 avro. 
 
 9. dvakdfiapev TrpSiTov\ "Let 
 us begin by reviewing some of 
 our results." Tbe word is used 
 absolutely in the same technical 
 sense in Theset. 187 c : *Ap' ovv 
 
 st ci^iov nepl 86£r]s dva\a(3elv 
 ■nd\iv ; Phileb. 60 d : vvv ovti- 
 o~ovv iiravakaficov dpBoTepov ei- 
 
 wara). Hence it is unnecessary 
 to insert ev with Heindorf or 
 ti with C. et corr. B. irpwrov 
 is used adverbially, ut supra : 
 rrpaTov oiov o~TavTes. 
 
 18. Kai gives emphasis to the 
 question as raising a fresh point 
 in connexion with the pre- 
 ceding. They profess to make 
 men controversialists. Well, 
 on what subject % Cf. Euthyd. 
 
 272 d : iv a el8S>, ti Ka\ paBrj- 
 aopeBa. 
 
 19. e£ dpxr/i — TfloV JT17] " In 
 
 examining this let us take 
 a comprehensive survey, and 
 begin as follows." For ?'£ dp- 
 xys, cf. Theset. 180 d. 
 
2CXM2TH2. 
 
 65 
 
 p. 232. dpxv? to-TQ) rfjde -rrrj. (pe'pe, irepl rwv deicov, <xr 
 dcfiavr} rots 7roA\ols, dp lkcxvovs ttoiovotl tovto 
 dpaif ; 
 
 GEAI. Aeyerai [y]oiw 8r) irepl olvtmv tolvtoi. 
 
 SE. TV S" 6aa (fyavepd yrjs re kcu ovpavov kou 5 
 Ttov 7T€pl rd toiolvtcl ; 
 
 0EAI. Tiydp; 
 
 SE. 'AAAet /x?)z> ev ye tolls i8lcu? crvi>ovorlais, 
 bivoTav yeveaem re kcu ovala? irepi Kara irdvTwv 
 Xeyrjral tl, i-vviapev a>? avrol re dvreLirelv 8eLi>oi 1° 
 rovs re dWov? otl ttolov(Tlv direp avrol ftvvarovs ; 
 
 GEAI. Ylavrdircuri ye. 
 d HE. TV 5' au 7re/3t vopcav /ecu ^vprrravrcov rwv 
 
 I. Trepi to>j> tfeiW] Cf. Rep. 
 
 10, 598 e, where the same 
 thing is said of the poets : kcu 
 rd ye 6ela. 
 
 4. yow] The MSS., with 
 exception of Flor. i, have ovv. 
 
 5. otra Cpavepd] Ar. Eth. Nic. 
 VII. 7 : dvOpamov aXXa rroXXd 
 Beiorepa ttjv (pvaiv, oiov (pavepa- 
 rard ye e£ iov 6 Kocrpos o~vvearr)Kev. 
 The distinction between the 
 visible and invisible in Divine 
 things is perhaps the same as in 
 Tim. 41a: ndvres oaoi re Trepu 
 7to\ov<ti (pavepas <a\ ocroi (paivov- 
 rai Kad' ocrov av edeXcoai 6eoi. 
 Or, possibly, the words oa-a 
 dcpavrj rols 7roXXoT? may suggest 
 the difference between the or- 
 dinary and the scientific per- 
 ception of the heavenly mo- 
 tions. Cf. lb. 39 c : twv S' 
 SXXwv Tas TTepiobovs ovk evvevo- 
 r/Kores av6pcoTroi, nXrjV oXiyoi 
 ru)v iroXXmv k. T. X. 
 
 yrjs re ml ovpavov] Gen. 
 
 of apposition after a neut. 
 
 plur. adj., like ao-rjpa — /3o^r 
 Soph. Ant. 1209. 
 
 6. rail/ nep\ to roiavra] Cf. 
 Theset. 145 d: Ka\ t£>v nepl 
 do-rpovopiav re nai dppovlas re 
 Kai Xoyiapovs. 
 
 7. Tiydp ;] " What, indeed V 
 ydp is the usual formula of 
 assent, confirming the previous 
 question : = " You may well 
 ask." 
 
 8. tv ye rati Idiais avvovaiais] 
 " In private conversations " 
 — Which are the proper sphere 
 of dvTiXoyiKi) as distinguished 
 from SiKaviKTj, to which refer- 
 ence is presently made ; cf. supr. 
 225 b. For the limitation 
 with ye, cf. Theset. 204 d : rav- 
 
 tov cipa, ev ye rols oaa e£ dpidpov 
 eo~TL, to re ndv npoo~ayopevopev 
 /cat Ta anavTa. 
 
 9. Trepl yeveaeios re Ka\ ovo-ias 
 
 — XeyrjTai ti ] " When any 
 general statement is made re- 
 specting the woi-ld of tran- 
 sitional or of absolute Being." 
 
 K 
 
(>G 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 Bedisputes 
 
 and teaches 
 others to 
 dispute, 
 about 
 things 
 divine, 
 mundane, 
 metaphy- 
 sical, legal, 
 political, 
 and on the 
 subject 
 matter of 
 every 
 branch of 
 art. The 
 Sophist 
 seems to 
 have the 
 power of 
 disputing 
 about all 
 things. 
 
 ttoXitlkwv, dp oi>)( viricryyovvTai TTOLtlv ufX(fjta(3r)Tr]- p. 232. 
 
 TLKOVS ; 
 
 0EAI. OvSels yap av olvtoIs, coy eiros eiirelv, 
 SieAe'yero p.r) tovto \mio-yyovp.evois. 
 5 HE. Ta ye prjv irep\ iracrcov re kou Kara p.lav 
 eKaaTrjv Te\vrjv } a del irpbs enaaTOv avrov rbu drjpi- 
 ovpyov dvTenrelv, SeSrjp.ocrMop.eva irov Kara/3e/3Ar^rat 
 yeypafx/jieva tu> /3ouAo/xeW padelv. 
 
 GEAI. Ta YlpcoTayopeid fxoi (fyaivei 7repl re 7rd\r)s 
 10 kcu tcou dWcov Teyywv e\pr\Kevai. e 
 
 HE. Kc« iroXXwv ye, a> /xaKapie, erepcop. drdp 
 8r) to rr}9 dvTtXoyt,Kr)S Te^vrjs dp ovk ev Ke^aXalco 
 irepl irdvToav 7rpb? dpjfyio-fiiynqcriv 'iKavr) tls Svvapus 
 eoiK elvai ; 
 
 1. iroulv ajxcj).] In the sphere 
 of law and justice the Sophist's 
 business is rather to enable 
 men to dispute than himself 
 to hold controversy. 
 
 dfMju(rfir)Tr}TiKovs ] So here 
 also the Bodl. MS. 
 
 3. Oi8els yap av] Cf. Theset. 
 I78e: tovto ye o-<p68pa vni- 
 crxveiTo — 1) ov8els y av avra 
 8te\e'yeTO. lb. l6l d. 
 
 5. Ta ye pr)v trepl ivao-a>v\ 
 With -repl iraacov must be sup- 
 plied a Set Xeyeiv from the fol- 
 lowing clause, in which the 
 expression becomes more de- 
 finite. 
 
 6. 7rp6s eK.ao~Tov\ Probably 
 
 neut. : SC. dpCpia^TjTTjpa. avTov 
 
 implies, They dictate even to 
 the masters of each craft. 
 
 7. 8t8rjp.oo~uop.eva — r<5 ftovAo- 
 
 pevw paOeh] " The mysteries 
 of each profession are published 
 in manuals for all to learn." 
 
 Compare the imaginary case 
 put in the Politicus, 299 c : 
 
 ov8eva yap dyvoelv to re laTpiKov 
 Kal to vyieivbv ox)8e to KvftepvijTiKov 
 Koi vavTiKov' ei-elvai yap to> @ov- 
 \opeva pavddveiv yeypap-peva Kal 
 ■Jarpia edr) neipeva. And for 
 KaTafie$kr)Tai, cf. Ar. Eth. Nic. 
 I. 3 : Ka'iToi ttoXKoI Xdyoi -rpos 
 at)Ta KaTa@e(S\r)VTai. 
 
 9. Ta— -rdXrjs] Diog. Laert. 
 9, 8, 55, mentions the treatise 
 of Protagoras on wrestling. 
 That on rhetoric is mentioned 
 in the Phaedrus, 267 c : Upa- 
 
 rayopfia 8e, a> Sco/cpares, ovk r\v 
 ToiavTa pevroi aTTa ; 'Opdoeneid 
 ye tis, u> 7tih, Kal ciXXa 7roXXa Kal 
 Ka\d. 
 
 12. to tt)s dvTiKoyiKTJs rexPTjs] 
 " As for the province of the 
 controversial art, does it not 
 seem," &c. Cf. Rep. 7, 519 b: 
 
 to Tr)s ToiaxiTTjS (pvaecos. Legg. 
 3, 683 d : to toii pvdov. 
 
20<I>12TH2. 
 
 07 
 
 0EAI. <ba'iveTaL yovv (jytftov ovdev v7roXiweiv. 
 
 S*E. 2i> 5?) 7T/0O9 6eu)v, co 7rai, SvvaTOv rjyel tovto ; 
 toluol yap dv v/iew fiev o^vTepov 01 veoi irpbs avTo 
 /3Xe7roiT€, rjpei? Se dpfiXvTepov. 
 
 0EAI. To 7TOLOV, kou 7rp6s tl paAiaTa Aeyeis ; 
 ov yap nov Karavoco to vvv epcoTcopevov. 
 
 S*E. Ei iravra tirLCTTacrOai riva dvOpcoircov earl 
 8vvaTov. 
 
 0EAI. MaKaptov pcevT dv tj/jlcov, co tjeve, i]v to 
 yevo?. 
 
 HE. TIcos ovv dv 7TOT€ tls irpos ye tov errLCTTa- 
 fievov avTos dveTnaTrjpcov cov bwair dv vyies tl 
 Aeycov avTenrelv ; 
 
 0EAT. Ovdafim. 
 
 S*E. Ti 7T0T ovv dv eirj to Trjs ao(f)icTTLKrJ9 Svva- 
 /x€(0? Oav/xa ; 
 
 I H I 1 1 1 | . , 
 Hil.l..' 
 
 3. ogvrepov oi veoi] Cf. Rep. 
 595 e : eVel 7roXXa tol of-vrepov 
 fiXenovTcov dp(3\i>Tepov opavres 
 
 wporepov el8ov. The young are 
 here ironically challenged to 
 use their keen eyesight to de- 
 termine a difficult question. In 
 Legg. 4,715 e, keen mental vi- 
 sion is spoken of as the privi- 
 lege of age. Nai p.a At", & give, 
 naff fj^iKiap yap 6£v ftXeneis. A0. 
 Ne'or p.ev yap &v nas avdpanos ra 
 TOinvra dp-^Xiirara avTos avTOv 
 opa, yepwv 8e o^vrara. For wpos 
 
 avro, cf. Rep. 7, 515 d, e : npos 
 
 to (pa>s — jSXenfiv. 
 
 5. To — daiifxa] " The secret," 
 " mystery," as of a juggling 
 trick. Cf. Legg. 1, 644 d, 
 645 b, d, where man is spoken 
 of as a puppet, or magical 
 contrivance, of the gods. 
 This rendering- of the word 
 
 in the present passage is con- 
 firmed by reference to 235 b : 
 
 OVKCT €K(j)ev£fTai TO p.Tj OV TOV 
 
 yevovs eivat. tov tu>v 6avpaTonoia>v 
 tis fir. 
 
 6. 011 yap ttov Karavoai] " For 
 I do not think I comprehend 
 (I suppose I do not compre- 
 hend) the drift of your ques- 
 tion." 7rco is read in a few 
 MSS., and is more pointed, but 
 does not seem to be certainly 
 right. The vagueness of nov 
 consorts well with the puzzled 
 tone of Thefetetus. 
 
 7. iravTa eVi'crracr&u] Cf. Eu- 
 
 thyd. 294 c, Ar. Met. 1, 2. 
 
 15. Tt' TTOTS 0-0(p(i)TaTOl] 
 
 " What then can be the mys- 
 tery of the Sophist's art?" 
 
 "Why?" 
 
 " I mean, how can they 
 create an impression in the 
 
 2, 
 
 In other 
 words, [a 
 universal 
 knowledge 
 possible 
 for man ? 
 J That were 
 happy for 
 mankind. 
 But with- 
 out know- 
 ledge of 
 a subject 
 how can 
 one dispute 
 with those 
 •' that know ? 
 What then 
 can be the 
 mystery of 
 the So- 
 phist's art ? 
 
6*8 
 
 nAATONOI 
 
 How does 
 lie raise the 
 baseless 
 fabric of a 
 belief that 
 he is all- 
 wise; with- 
 out which 
 he could 
 not hope for 
 a disciple 
 or a fee ? 
 
 0EAI. Tov 81) irepi ; p. 233. 
 
 HE. Kac? ov TLva rpoirov rrore 8vvaro\ toIs veois h 
 
 ootjav 7rapao~K€vd(JEiv, co? elcri iravra ttolvtcov avroi 
 
 ao(f)o)Taroi. SrjXov yap ay? el porrre. dvreXeyov 6p0(o? 
 
 5 /jL1]T€ iieeivois efyaivovro, (fyaivopevoi re el p.rj8ev av 
 
 p.aXXov e8oKOW 8id rrjv dp.(f)io-fir)Tr}o-iv elvai (fipovip.01, 
 
 TO GOV 8rj TOVTO, CT^oAr) 7TOT OLV OLVTols TL9 \pT)p.aTa 
 
 8i8ovs rjOeXev av tovtcov avrcov pa6r)Tr\s ylyveaOai. 
 0EAI. *2,)(oAfj fievr av. 
 lo HE. "Nvv 8e y eOeXovaiv ; 
 GEAI. Kcu fmXa. 
 
 HE. AoKovat yap, oifiat, irpos Tama e7naTi]p.6vo)s c 
 e\eiv uvtoI Trpos direp dvriXeyovaiv. 
 GEAI. Flcoy yap ov ; 
 15 HE. Apcoai 8e ye tovto wpoy arravTa, <pap.ev : 
 
 minds of the youth, that they, 
 and they alone, are in all ways 
 the wisest of all men." 
 
 1 . Tov irepi ;] " About what 
 point 1 ?" I. e. What is the point 
 which a knowledge of his mys- 
 tery would make clear 1 
 
 2. Ka#' ov riva] The indirect 
 interrogative in a reply, as el 
 Travra elbivai just above. For 
 
 iravra, cf. Soph. Antig. 721 : 
 
 (pvvai tov avbpa irdvr eViOTjJ/iijs 
 ■nkiov. 
 
 Bvvarol] bvvaros, like a£ios, 
 seems sometimes to dispense 
 with the verb thai, and the re- 
 petition of ela\ is thus avoided 
 here. 
 
 3. ai T o\] Cf. Theast. 178 e : 
 
 tovto — \mi(T)(yciTO iravrav 8ia<f>e- 
 peiv avTos. " The only men." 
 
 5. pf)T€ eKeivois i(paivoPTo\ For 
 the ellipse of the infinitive, 
 avrCkeyeiv 6p6as, compare Rep. 
 
 4, 430 d : KpeiTToa 8fj avrov (pai- 
 vovrai ovk oi8' ovriva rp&nov (sc. 
 \eyovres) na\ aXXa arra rotavra 
 &anep 'i\vr) avrov Xeyerat. Thuc. 
 III. 16 : av€xa>pr}aav — eneibff 
 Ka\ eKeivovt eidov. 
 
 el fiT)8ev\ Bodl. €i pr/ prjbev, 
 with A and pr. n. 
 
 7. to a6v 8rj tovto] u To quote 
 your own observation." 
 
 8. TOVTiOV a\]TO>v\ SC. TOl> O.VTI- 
 
 \eyeiv re <a\ dpcpiafirjTeiv 7rep\ 
 TrdvTav : for which rendering 
 cf. supr. 232 b : avrov tovtov 
 (SC tov avriXoyiKov elvai) StSa- 
 a-KaXcv yiyveo~8ai. avrols should 
 
 be repeated with paBrjr. yiyv. 
 
 13. avrol] " They appear (to 
 the young man) to be them- 
 selves well-inftmned on the 
 points on which they dis- 
 pute." 
 
 15. Ap5>o-i tovto] Sc. dvrCKe- 
 yovaw. 
 
20M2TH2. 
 
 69 
 
 3- 0EAI. Nat. 
 
 HE. YlavTa apa cro(f)oi tol? paOrjrah (jmivovTai. 
 GEAI. Tturjv; 
 
 3<E. Ovk 6vt€S ye' ahvvarov yap tovto ye e(fjamj. 
 
 GEAI. Tlco? yap ovk a&vvarov ; 5 
 
 S"E. AotjaaTiKr)i> apa tlvol irep\ iravruiv einaTr]- 
 firjv 6 ao(piaTT)9 rjfjuu, aAA' ovk aXijdeiav eywv avair'e- 
 <PavTat. 
 d GEAI. YlauraTracrt fxev ovv. Ka\ KtvSvvevet ye to 
 vvv elpr/fievov opdorara wept avrcov elprjordai. io 
 
 SE. Aaftoopev tolvvv aa(peo~Tep6v n 7rapd8ety/JLa 
 7repl tovtcov. 
 
 GEAI. To irolov 8r} ; 
 
 ££E. To6V. /ecu p.oi 7reipco Trpoo-e\(x)v top vovv ev 
 fxaXa a-KOKpivaaOai. 15 
 
 GEAI. To irolov ; 
 
 HE. Eft Tis (pair) fir) Xeyew /jayo* avTiAeyeiv, aAAa 
 
 This unreal 
 appearance 
 of universal 
 
 wisdom is 
 the phe- 
 nomenon 
 which we 
 have to 
 consider. 
 
 6. Aotjao-TiKT]v] " A know- 
 ledge which is in appearance 
 only." fio£a is here opposed to 
 a\T)6eia, as appearance to reality. 
 Cf. infr. 268 c: to ttjs bogao-TiKTjs 
 mfjLTjriKov. There is, however, an 
 allusion to the other (subjec- 
 tive) meaning of 86£ja ( = opin- 
 ion) as Opposed to emo-Tr)pr) 
 (cf. Theset. 207 c, 208 e), just 
 as the word akrjdeia is probably 
 used with reference to the 0X17- 
 6eia (or certainty) of Protago- 
 ras. Compare the confusion 
 of the two meanings of dvorjros, 
 noticed by Mr. Grote in Parni. 
 132 c, Phsed. 80 b. Grote's 
 Plato &c, ii. 272, note p. 
 
 9. to vvv — elprjoSai^ Cf. 
 Theeet. 186 e: Kal pdXiard ye 
 vvv KarcKpaveo-Tarov yeyovcv aX\o 
 
 bv alaBrjo-ecos e'nco-Trjpr). 
 
 1 4, 7rpoo~e)(a>v tov vovv ev pdXa] 
 " Giving me your very closest 
 attention." For the position of 
 
 ev pdXa, cf. Phsed. 1 1 6 e : deinvrj- 
 o-avrds re Kal iriovras ev pdXa. 
 For Kai introducing an impera- 
 tive, cf. Theret. 145 d, Kal fioi 
 Xeye alib. ; and compare the 
 use of Kai fjioi Xeye (or dvayv&dt) 
 to ^(pio-pa &c. by the orators. 
 
 17. Xe'yew] Sllbaudi enio-Ta- 
 
 o-6ai. The same illustration 
 which is used here to depre- 
 ciate the Sophist is applied 
 to the poets in Rep. 10, 596 c : 
 
 'AXX' opa 8t) Ka\ rov8e riva KaXels 
 tov 8i]piovpyov. Tov nolov ; *Oy 
 irdvra iroie'i, oaanep eis emo-ros 
 t5>v x fl P 0T( X v * >v *• T - ^- HdW 
 6avpaar6v — Xeyeis o-o(piOTr]V. 
 
70 
 
 nAATftNOS 
 
 Imagine 
 a parallel 
 
 case. Sup- 
 pose IIIK' t>> 
 
 profess, not 
 that he 
 knows, but 
 that he can 
 create all 
 things : 
 men, ani- 
 mals, the 
 sea, the 
 heaven, 
 the Gods. 
 
 TroLelv koll 8pdu pid r^x v V ^vdiruvra ewtaraaOai p. 233 
 Trpayfiara. 
 
 0EAI. Ilwy iravra etVey ; e 
 
 HE. Ttjv apxh v T °v pv]@zvT09 (TV y rjpiv ev6v? 
 5 dyvoeis' to. yap ^vpiravra, a>? eot/ca?, ov fiavOdvus. 
 
 GEAI. Ov yap ovv. 
 
 HE. Aeyco to'lvvv ere kcu e'/xe twv 7rdvrcou, Kal 
 Trpoy rjfiLP rdXXa £coa Ka\ 8ev8pa. 
 
 0EAI. Um Aeyet? ; 
 10 (HE. Ei rt^ e'/ue /cat ere /cat raAAa 0ura irdvTa 
 7roirj(T€Li> (f)a[r). 
 
 0EAI. TtVa 5?) Xeycou ttju iroiiqcriv ; ou yap 8rj 
 yewpyov ye epeh rivd' Kal yap (cocov ovtov emes P« 234 
 
 7TOLT]Tr)V. 
 
 <5 3?E. ^tyfu, /cat 777)0? ye OaXdrrrj^ [/cat 777c-] /cat 
 ovpavov Kal Oecoi/ Kal tcou a\\a>v ijv/JL7rduT(oi>* Kal 
 Toivvv Kal ra)(y 7roir)cra$ avrwv eKaara irdvv a/iLKpov 
 i/Ofx[(rfjLaro9 aVooYcWat. 
 
 Compare Emped. Fr.13 4-141: 
 a>s 8 oirorav ypafpees — Kai re 6e- 
 ovs 8o\i)(aia>vas rififjai (pepicrrovs. 
 
 I. fhjvarravra — ^v/xnavraj 
 Note the variety. 
 
 4. Tr)v dpxhv] " The very key 
 to ray meaning is unknown to 
 you. You do not understand 
 what I mean by All." 
 
 7. Aeyco — tS>v Tvdvrav\ Cf. 
 Rep. 5, 398 C : eya — Kivhvvevat 
 euros t£>v Trdvrav eivai. 
 
 IO. Kal raXka (pvraj The no- 
 tion of cpvra need not include 
 efie Kai ve, according to a well- 
 known Platonic use of o'XXos, 
 e. g. Ale. II2b: rois re 'Axalois 
 Kal rols aXXots Tpwcriv : with 
 
 which compare Horn. Od. 2, 
 43. But the word is probably 
 
 used here in the widest sense 
 ( = creatures) ; cf. Tim. 90 a : 
 
 <as ovras fjpds (pvrov ovk eyyeiov 
 dXX' ovpdviov. Rep. 6, 49 1 d : 
 -rravrbs (mepfiaros ivepl rj (pvrov 
 e'ire ra>v iyyeimv e'ire ra>v £w(ov. 
 Theag. 121b. 
 
 12. \eyu>v\ Sc. (pair] civ. 
 
 15. <$>T]p.i] "Yes." Cf. Phsedr. 
 270 c. 
 
 Kal yrjs] These words oc- 
 cur only in two MSS., Ven. S. 
 and Flor. i, which however 
 belong to different families. 
 They are not absolutely re- 
 quired, for the earth as well 
 as the sun may be included in 
 the expression ko.1 8e5>v. But 
 cf. Rep. 10, 596 d : Kal irpbs 
 
 rovrois yrjv Ka) ovpavov Kal deovs. 
 
20M2TH2. 
 
 71 
 
 >. 234« 0EAI. Wouhiav Aeyei? riva. 
 
 HE. TV he ; •n)j> roO XeyovTOS otl ttolvtol olhe Kal 
 raura erepou av hiha^eiev oAlyov kou ev oXiyw ^povco, 
 fxiov ov iroubiav vop.Lo~Teov ; 
 
 GEAI. ndl>TC09 7TOV. 5 
 
 b HE. YlcuSia? he e\eL$ rj n TeyyLKWTepov ?) kou 
 XapieaTepov ethos y to /iLpiyTLKOi/ ; 
 
 GEAI. Ovhapco?' irapnroXv yap elprjKas eiho? els 
 ei> TravTa ^vkXaftcov kou ax^hou irotKiXoiTaTov. 
 
 HE. Ovkovv rov y v7na\vovp.evov hvvaTov eivanc 
 pua Teyyri iravTa iroielv yiyvcoo-Ko/nev tvov tovtoi/, otl 
 fM/JLrj/JLaTCL kou 6p.coi>v/JLa tcov ovtcov airepyatppevos tyj 
 
 2. Ttjv tov \eyovros] Sc. Tex v 1 v - 
 
 Compare Coleridge, Friend, 
 vol. iii. p. 145 : "For the 
 ancients, as well as the mod- 
 erns, had their machinery for 
 the extemporaneous mintage of 
 intellects, by means of which, 
 off-hand, as it were, the scholar 
 was enabled to make a figure 
 on any and all subjects, on any 
 and all occasions." 
 
 4. p.wv ov 7rai8iav vop.io~reov\ 
 
 Cf. Euthyd. 278 c: nai8iav 8e 
 
 \eyco 81a. ravTa, on, el Kal 7roXXa 
 tis rj Kal TravTa ra roiavra fiddoi, 
 ra pev irpdypara oi8ev av paXXov 
 el8elrj nfi e'xei, irpocrTrai^eLV 8e olds 
 t av e'trj rols dvdpurtvcos. Legg. 
 2, 66*] e : Kal irai8idv ye ttjv 
 ai)Ti)v ravrtjv Xeya Tore orav pyre 
 Ti. (SkaTTTy prjre a>(pe\{j aTrov8rjs fj 
 
 \6yov agiov. The contempt for 
 the art of painting which is 
 here expressed reappears in 
 Legg. 6, 769 b : ivrpi^ — ov- 
 
 8ap.ws ye'yova rfj roiavrj] Te\vr] . 
 — Kal ov8ev ye efikdftj}?. See 
 also Polit. 277 C : ypacprjs 8e 
 Ka\ (Tvpira(TT]s ^eiponpyi'as \e£ei 
 
 Kal Xoyw 8t]\ovv nav £cbov pdWov 
 Trpeivei rols 8vvapevoi<; e-rrea-Oai. 
 6. TexyiKtorepov xapieo-re- 
 
 pov] " More artful," and there- 
 fore more worthy of the So- 
 phist ; " more amusing," and 
 therefore more deserving of 
 the name naiSid. Cf. Polit. 
 288 c, where piprjTiK-q is in- 
 cluded under mdyviov. 
 
 8. 7rajnrroXv] " Most exten- 
 sive." Lit. "abundant." Cf. 
 infr. 236 b. 
 
 9. 7TOlKi\a)TaTOV ] " Most 
 
 various." Cf. Theset. 146 d : 
 TroiKiXa dv8' dnXov. 
 
 1 1 . yiyvaHTKopev irov tovtop] 
 
 tovtov, although the reading of 
 only two MSS. (Par. H. Flor. 
 b), is certainly preferable to 
 tovto, because adding point to 
 the parallel : and has been 
 introduced into the text by 
 Stallbaum. The same reading 
 had previously been conjec- 
 tured by Van Heusde. 
 
 12. Spuvvpa] Cf. Parm. 133 
 d : ra — nap' i]piv ravra, opwvvpa 
 ovra e\eivois. 
 
 We should 
 understand 
 
 at once 
 that he is 
 a painter, 
 and that 
 
72 
 
 nAATQNOS 
 
 his arc 
 
 only mimic 
 " crea- 
 tions ;" by 
 which, 
 however, 
 he can im- 
 pose from 
 a distance 5 
 on the less 
 intelligent 
 amongst 
 young 
 children. 
 There is 
 also a 
 mimic art 
 of reason- 
 ing, by IO 
 
 ypa(f)iKr) T€)(i>r) Swaros earaL tov? uvoi]tovs tcou viwv p. 234 
 iraiSoov, iroppmdev rd yeypappeva hriBeuaws^ XavOd- 
 veiv, cu?, o ti 7rep av ftovXrjOfj Spav, tovto 'ikolvcotoltos 
 cov diroTeXelv epycp. 
 
 0EAI. Ylco? yap ov ; 
 
 SiE. TV 8e 8/] ; irepl tov? Xoyov? dp ov irpoaBo- 
 Kwp.€v elvai twcl aXXr/v re^vrju ; j-rj °V"f Swarbv av 
 Tvyyaveiv tov? vkov? /cat en Troppco tmv irpaypLaroav 
 Trj? dXr/OeLa? d(peo~TU)Ta? 81a tQ>v cotwu toi? Xoyoi? 
 yorjTevetv, SeiKvvvTa? etScoXa Xeyofieva wept 7rdvT(x>v 9 
 
 2. iroppa&ev — afacrrcoTas] Ct. 
 *. I, 663 b : (TKOToSiviav 8e 
 to noppooOev 6pa)p.evov iracri re a>s 
 eirog elireiv nal 8tj kcu toIs natal 
 napex". The spirit of Prot. 314b 
 is the same : rj^ls yap en veoi, 
 (bare toctovto irpaypa 8ie\eo~dai. 
 
 Cf. also Kep. 1, 331 e : &o-nep 
 
 fjdr) eyyvrepoy &>v rav ocei fidWov 
 ti KaQopa avrd. 
 
 7. nva aXXrfv Texvrjv] roiavr-qv, 
 which Heindorf proposed to 
 insert before rexvrjv, is found 
 in C. H. c, and has been 
 added by a recent hand in 
 two other MSS. But with 
 roiavTT] following (infr. d), the 
 common reading is more pro- 
 bable. 
 
 + »7 oi+] The reading of 
 most MSS., 17 ov Swarov av 
 
 rvyxdveiv, is awkward unless 
 Toiavrijv is added above, ov 
 may possibly have arisen from 
 aZ following. The translation 
 of Ficinus (qua seductores — 
 adolescentulos decipere vale- 
 ant) points to Schleiermacher's 
 conjecture, T] bvvarbv av rvyxd- 
 veiv, which is also supported 
 by a correction of the Coisli- 
 
 nian MS. (fj Bvvarov.) (fj ov 
 n.) For rvyxdveiv with the ad- 
 jective, cf. Tim. 61 d, rvyxdvet 
 — raiira — Sward "hex^^vai, and 
 
 seven other passages quoted 
 
 by Ast, Lex. S. V. rvyxdvco. 
 And for the infinitive after the 
 relative #(subaud. ivpoo-boKa>pev), 
 
 cf. Parm. 130 e : thai e'idr) cirra, 
 S>v rate — ras inavvp-ias i'cr^ftv. 
 
 8. tovs veovs Ka\ en iroppco] 
 A similar parallel is drawn 
 between rhetoric and tragic 
 poetry in Gorgias 502 d : Nw 
 
 cipa 17/xety evprjKapev prjTopiKrjv 
 nva Trpbs brjpov toiovtov oiov irai- 
 8cov re 6/j.ov Kal yvvaiKcov Kal 
 dv8pa>v, Kal 8ov\a>v Kal i\ev6epa>v, 
 rjv ov irdw dydpeda, koXokiktjv yap 
 avrrjv (ttjv tt)s rpaycodias iroirjcnv) 
 qbapav eivai. See also ib. 458 
 e, where the " omniscience" of 
 the rhetor is noticed : wepl 
 
 irdvTcov (prjTopiKOv) war iv o^Xw 
 iridavbv ehai. Ib. 459 b: 6 ovk 
 el8u>s tov etSdroy iv ovk el86ai 
 TTidavcoTepos. Compare Legg. 
 2, 658 C : il p.ev tolvvu Ta ap,iKpa 
 Kpivoi iraihia, Kpivovo~i tov rd dav- 
 p.ara inideiKVvvTa. 
 
 IO. ei'SaXa Xeyopeva] .■= rd iv 
 
2()<I>I2TH2. 
 
 73 
 
 p. 234. Q)0~T€ 7T0L€LV dX^Ovj 8oK€W Xey€(T0UL KCU TOV XtyOVTU 
 
 Srj ao(j)(OTaToi> irdvToov uttolvt civcti ; 
 
 d 0EAI. TV ydp ovk av eiq aXXrj tls roiavri] 
 rexyrj ; 
 
 S*E. Tov? ttoAAow ovu, J^coJ QtalrrjTe, rwv Tore 
 olkovovtcov dp ovk dvdyKi^ XP^ V0V T€ zttcXOovtos 
 avTois LKauov kou 7rpoiovcrr)s rjXiKias, tols re overt 
 TrpocnriiTTOVTas eyyvOeu koll did iraO^jidroiv uvayKa- 
 {ppevovs evapyws efydirTeaOai rcov optcov, perafidX- 
 Xeiv tol9 rore yevopievas Soijas, cocrre apuKpd p}v 
 <j)aivecr6ai rd pteydXa, ^aXeird 8e rd pdSia, kcll irdvra 
 
 e Travrrj dvarer pd(pOai rd iu rol? Xoyois (^avrdo-para 
 vwo twv iv tolls irpa^ecriv epyu>v irapayzvopiviov ; 
 
 rots Xoyois (pavraa-para, infr. e. 
 " Exhibiting fictitious argu- 
 ments, as the painter exhi- 
 bited fictitious shapes." There 
 is a stress on \eyopeva as op- 
 posed to yeypappeva emdeiKPvs 
 above. Compare Theset. 150 e : 
 
 yJAevSrj Koi ei'ftcoXa ivepl irXeiovos 
 iroirjcrapevoi rod akrjBovs. For 
 the plural SeiKvvvTas, to which 
 objection has been made, cf. 
 Theast. 172 b: edeXovcrcv Icrxv- 
 pi£ecrdat. lb. 1 67 b : 8oga£ovras 
 avyyevrj eavTtjs, and notes. 
 
 i. Trotelv — 8oi<elv] " To make 
 them think." 
 
 5. Tovs 7ToX\ovs — 7rapayevo- 
 ixevav] " Is it not then, Theee- 
 tetus, inevitable, that most of 
 the auditors of such lectures 
 in process of time, as they get 
 older, coming into close con- 
 tact with realities, and being 
 compelled by sad experience 
 to see and feel things as they 
 are, will change the opinions 
 which were then created, so 
 
 that what seemed great will 
 appear small, and what seemed 
 easy, difficult ; and the ima- 
 ginations, awakened by dis- 
 course, will be completely 
 overturned by the facts which 
 encounter them in action." 
 
 [S>] emiTrjre] The Bodl. 
 omits S> with An. 
 
 8. 81a 7m6T)pdr(ov] According 
 
 to the " rpiyepcov pvdos," 7ra6i)- 
 para padrjpara. 
 
 9. evapyas] " To come into 
 unmistakeable contact with re- 
 ality." 
 
 10. crpiKpa — ra peyaXa] E.g. 
 wealth, distinction, &c. 
 
 11. xaAe7ra — ra pabut] E.g. 
 
 the government of men. 
 
 13. vtto roiv iv rais irpa^cnv 
 epycov Tvapayevopevcov] "The reali- 
 ties which have encountered 
 them in action." Compare the 
 complaint of Adimantus in Rep. 
 6, 487 b, c. And cf. Legg. 6, 
 
 769 d : irpo'iovTos tov xp^vov, koi 
 tcov 8o£('wtcov f'py<p Tteipcopevov. 
 
 Whirl, 
 
 youth and 
 inexperi- 
 ence iii.iy 
 be de- 
 ceived, 
 
 for long 
 
74 
 
 riAATONOS 
 
 TheaRtetus 
 assents, 
 i bough he 
 feels thai 
 he is still 
 one of those 
 "at a dis- 
 tance" 
 from the 
 truth of 
 things. 
 Str. "It is 
 our endea- 
 vour to 
 anticipate 
 experience 
 and to 
 draw you 
 
 0EAI. '0? yovv efjioi TT)XtK(h8e ovn Kplvat. cu'/xcu p. 
 8e kcu €fie ru>v eri iroppcdOev ucjjecrTrjKOTCou eivai. 
 
 aE. Toiyapovv r)i±eis ae otSe iravres neipaaofieOa 
 Kai vvv 7reipu)/i€0a &>? iyyvrara avev roiv 7raOrjpdrcov 
 hTrpocrayeiv. 7rep\ <5' ovv rod crocpiaTov rode /uloi Xeye' 
 iroTepov rjSr) tovto croupe? on tcov yorjToov eari tl?, p. 
 
 fli/X1]T1]9 OJV TCOV OVTOJV, 7] diaTatfifieV 6TL fir) 7T6/01 
 
 ocrcovTvep dvTiXeyeiv Sokcl 8vvolto? eivai, 7rep\ toctov- 
 tcov kcu ra? eirxTTrjiias dX-qOcos k\cov Tvyyava ; 
 i0 0EAI. Kcu 7tco? dv, co ije've ; dXXd ayebov rfSr) 
 aa(j)€? €K tcov elprj/xevcov on tcov tyjs 7rou8ia9 fxere- 
 \ovtcov earl n? fiepcov. 
 
 lb. 10, 888 b : & nal, veos 
 ef, npoicov 8e ae 6 xpovos 7rotrjaei 
 iroXXa hv vvv §o£d£ei? peTafta- 
 \6vra eirl rdvavria Tideadai. 
 
 I. 'Cls epol — Kplvat = as epol 
 
 Kpirfj. The infinitive is epexe- 
 getic. 
 
 3. Toiyapovv r)pels ae o"i8e\ 
 Cf. Legg. IO, 905 c : ravra el p,ev 
 ae ire'idei Kkeivlas o8e ko.1 ^vpnaaa 
 rjpwv r]8e r) yepovaia, Kakas av aoi 
 Kai 6 debs avTbs £-vWap(Sdvoi. 
 
 impels otSe] = {-evos, Qe68a>pos, 
 2a>KpaTr]s. 
 
 4. tSjv TradriixaTav] The article 
 refers to 81a Tvadrjparav above. 
 
 5. 0' ovv] " But, to return." 
 7. prj expresses that an af- 
 firmative answer to the question 
 which it introduces is regarded 
 as possible. 
 
 I 2 . earl, tis pepav] Heindorf 
 objects to p.epcbv on the ground 
 that the only way of constru- 
 ing the words as they stand is 
 to suppose p-epuv to be go- 
 verned by perexovrmv. " That 
 he is one of those who par- 
 take of the divisions of child's- 
 
 play." But why may not the 
 words be taken more simply? — 
 "That he occupies (lit. is) one of 
 the departments which partake 
 of the nature of child's-play." 
 The confusion of the man and 
 his function, the juxtaposition 
 of the masculine with the femi- 
 nine and neuter, has already 
 occurred several times in this 
 dialogue, e. g. 225 a : to xPV- 
 
 panariKov yevos, ipi.aTiK.rjs ov 
 Texvrjs, — early — 6 ao(piarr)s. 
 The article in ttjs 7rai8ias re- 
 fers to p. 234 a : 7rai8iav — 
 7ratSta?. Accordingly, tcov ttjs 
 
 7ratoids perexovToov pepav IS 
 
 equivalent to tS>v tt)s pipT)riKr)s 
 pepwv. That pipr/TiKT] is divided 
 into many parts is implied 
 supr. 234 b, els ev iravTa gvWa- 
 /3fflv, and in the epithet ttoiki- 
 \ararov. Cf. also infr. C : Kara 
 peprj rrjs pipr}TiKr)s. 235 a: ttjs 
 pipr/TiKrjs to eiil tovtco pepos. 
 lb. b : ttoXv tovto to p.epos Kara 
 
 — p,ipr]TLKrjv. The conjecture 
 ets, adopted by the Zurich edi- 
 tors (earl tis pepav els. Totjtu), 
 
2CXM2TH2. 75 
 
 p. 235. HE. Ely yoijTa ptev 81) Ka\ piiprjTrji/ apa OeTeov 
 
 0EAI. IlcSy yap ov OeTeov ; 
 
 HE. 'Aye 81], vvv i-jfxlrepov epyov rj8rj tov Orjpa 
 b prjKer aveivai' aye8ov yap avTov irepieiki^apiev evb 
 
 ap.({)l(3Al1(TTpiKCp Tivl TCOV ev TOIS \6yOl9 7Tepl TO. 
 
 roiavra opyavcov, coare ouk€t eK(pev£eTai Tooe ye. 
 
 0EAI. To ivoLov ; 
 
 HE. To /uly] ov tov yevovs elvai tov tcov OavpiaTo- 
 ttoicov Ti? eh. *< 
 
 GEAI. Kdpiol tovto ye ovtco irep\ avTov ^vv8oKel. 
 
 HE. Ae8etKTai tolvvv o tl Ta^iaTa 8iaipeiv rrjv 
 
 But what 
 
 □ 
 
 he not ;t 
 
 mimic and 
 
 a maker 
 
 I 
 
 though involving only a slight 
 change, is unmeaning and gives 
 a wrong emphasis. The case is 
 different below (235 b : ns els), 
 where the point is that he cannot 
 escape being some one amongst 
 the varieties of the genus jug- 
 gler. Here naiSias is the em- 
 phatic word. 
 
 The next words, els yorjTa, 
 admit of a similar explanation. 
 The masculine noun is substi- 
 tuted for the neuter of the kind 
 or genus. He must be referred 
 to the genus sorcerer, and to a 
 species of mimic. Cf. Polit. 
 281 C : irorepov ovv 6 nepl ttjs 
 
 ixpavTiKrjs Adyo? Ixaveos corral 
 
 ftiG>pi.o~pevos, eav ap' airrjv twv 
 eTTipekeiav, OTrocrai ivep\ rrjv epedv 
 ia6rjTa, els ttjv KaXKlarrjv kcu 
 peylarr^v Tracrcov ridapev ; where, 
 
 however, the Zurich editors 
 have elal, but see note. Legg. 
 
 9, 867 b : els eluova pev ap(pco 
 Belvat. Tim. 57 e : els dvcopaXo- 
 TTjra ridapev. For a similar use 
 of the concrete for the ab- 
 
 stract, cf. Rep. 382 d : IloiTjTr]s 
 
 apa yjsevbrjs ev Bern ovk. evi. 
 
 i. yorjTa] So the art of 
 the Xoyo7rotot is described in 
 Euthyd. 289 e : eVn — ttjs rav 
 eTTcpdap Te%vr]s popiov o~piKpa> tl 
 eKeivrjs vnoSeearepa. 
 
 4. vvv rjperepov — aveivai] The 
 
 near approach made in these 
 words to an anapaestic tetra- 
 meter can hardly be accidental. 
 And there is a tone of bur- 
 lesque tragedy in the order of 
 the words. 
 
 6. dp<fiil3\r](rTpiKcp tivl] Sc. 
 dpydva, viz. the eiSos of piprj- 
 
 riKrj in which we have confined 
 him. Cf. Euthyd. 302 b : ano- 
 pov rtva <TTpo<fir)V e(pevyov re Kal 
 eaTpe(p6pr]V rjSrj, aonep ev olktvco 
 elXijppevos. 
 
 10. tis els] Some one or other 
 of those included in the race 
 of jugglers. Cf. Soph. Antig. 
 262 : els yap rts fjv emcrTos 
 ovtjeipyao-pevos. 
 
 12. AedeiKrai tolvvv] Sc. 8eu>. 
 Cf. Theset. 197 a : tovtov t 
 
76 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 It bo, we 
 
 must take 
 the art of 
 image- 
 making 
 and pro- 
 c< ed \\ iili 
 our method 
 of dr\ i- 
 sions. 
 
 ei8oj\o7roiLK7]v Te^iju, koll KaTafidvTas els avTr^v, iai> p. 235. 
 /xeV i]fAas tvOvs 6 ao(j)icrTi)? VTrofielvrj, avAAa(3eli> 
 avrov Kara ra e7rearaXp.eva imo rov (BacriXiKOv 
 Xoyov, KUKelvcp napahovras diro^vac rrjv dypav' c 
 
 5 edv <5' dpa Kara p.epr) rrj? pup.rjrLKrjs' Bvtjtou 7rr), £vva- 
 KoXovOelv aura), Siaipovvra? del rrjv VTrobeyop.evr)v 
 avrov ptoipav, ecoarrep dv Xr}(j)6r}. rvdvrais ovre ovros 
 ovre dXXo yevos ovdev p.r) irore eKfpvyhv errev^qrai 
 ri]u rcov ovrco Svvap-evcov \xerievai kol@' eKacrra re koll 
 
 loeVt iravra peOodov. 
 
 av e'tpr] a7re)(e(T6ai, and note. 
 Isocr. Nicocl. 36 : cprjpl 8fj 
 
 TTpaTTUv eKaaTOv f]jj.a>v eVt/xeXws'. 
 
 AedoKTcu, the reading of some 
 MSS. and of the old editions, 
 agrees well with the preced- 
 ing context, but not so well 
 Avith the new matter in what 
 follows. Compare Kep. 4, 432 b : 
 vvv Sj) rjpas Set axTTrep Kvvrjyhas 
 Tivas dupvov TrepucrTacrdat., nvpo- 
 cre)(OVTa<i rov vovv prj ttj] dia(pvyrj 
 rj 8a<aio(TvvT] Kal d(pavt.o-$eiaa ci8r]- 
 Aos yivrjrai. 
 (i 2.) Ae'SeiKrat — /ze#o'8oi/]"Then 
 
 the duty is proved of opening 
 Avith all speed the art of image- 
 making, and descending into 
 it ; where, if we find the (So- 
 phist immediately awaiting us, 
 we must apprehend him in 
 the name of Eeason, who is 
 our royal master, and render 
 and declare our capture ; but 
 if he lurk in one of the many 
 compartments of imitative art, 
 we must follow him closely, 
 always opening the cell which 
 contains him, until he be 
 caught. Surely neither he nor 
 any other kind shall boast 
 of having eluded the pursuit 
 
 of those who are able thus to 
 follow the most minute and 
 also the most comprehensive 
 inquiry." 
 
 1. elScoXoTTouKT] is synony- 
 mous with pipt]TlKT]. 
 
 2. irropelvrj 8vr]Tai\ He is 
 
 imagined as a flying enemy 
 who may either turn to bay or 
 hide himself in the bush. 
 
 3. vno rov (HaaiXiKov Aoyou] 
 Compare Pindar's vopos navrmv 
 paaikevs. For Custom, as the 
 king of men, Plato would sub- 
 stitute Eeason ; vovs for vopos. 
 
 4. aTToffivai rrjv aypav\ See 
 
 the story of Polycrates and the 
 fisherman in Herod. III. 42. 
 
 J. irdvrws ov\ Polit. 269: rrdv- 
 ra>s ov rroWa eK(pevyeis Traidias errj. 
 
 8. oi — pr] noTe eKCpvyov enev- 
 ijrjTai] This sounds like an echo 
 of Soph. (Ed. Col. 1024: ovs 
 
 ov ur) rrore ^copa? (pvyovres ttjo-8' 
 eTrev^covrai Oeo'is. See oiiceT in- 
 
 (pevgerai supr., and cf. Legg. 
 
 IO, 900 a : ov pr) irore eirev^r/rat 
 irepiyeveadai 6eav. II). 12, 969 
 b : to ye dvbpeioraros eivat 80- 
 Kelv — ova incpev^ei irore. 
 
 9. naS" e/cacrra — iravra] Pass- 
 ing over no kind and extend- 
 
20<I>I2TH2. 
 
 77 
 
 re i a 
 
 p. 235. 0EAI. Aeyei? ev, /ecu tclvtcl ravrj) iroLi]Teov. 
 
 SE. Kara dr/ tov 7rapeXt]Av6oTa Tpoirov tij? 8lul- ti 
 d peaetos eycoye jjlol kcll vvv (j)alvopaL 8vo Kadopu.v e\8i] appu 
 tt)s pip->]TiKi]9 Ti]v oe (r]Tovpevr)v Loeav, ev oiroTepo) 
 iroO* rjplv ovaa Tvyyavei, KarapLaOeiv ovSe7rco p.0L$ 
 8okco vvv 8vvoltos eirai. 
 
 0EAI. 2?) <5' aAA' ei7re irpcoTov kcll 8leXe rjplv 
 rive to) 8vo key as. 
 
 £;E. Wllav /jl€V ti~jv eiKaarLKrjv bpcov ev avrrj The for- 
 
 1 » m <•/ /. f / v v mer, whicli 
 
 Teyyr\v. ecrTL o avTrj jiaAicrTa, oiroTav Kara ra? tov 10 W e may 
 
 ^ / / , / \ , r call a like- 
 
 Trapaoeiy holtos avp^peTpLas tis ev p.7]K€i kcll irAarei n ess, is 
 
 v Q //, \ n / y / j 5, in \ that in 
 
 kcll pat/ei, kcll irpos tovtols erL yjpcopaTCL airooLOovs wn i c h the 
 
 \ / «/ \ ~ / / propor- 
 
 e tcl 7rpoai]Kovra e/cacrrcuy, tijv tov pipLrjpLaros yeveaLv tj ons and 
 
 > t y colours of 
 
 airepyaip-jTaL. the original 
 
 0EAI. Ti 8'; OV TTOLVTeS o\ pLlpLOVpevOL TL TOVT 15 pressed. 
 
 eiTL)(eLpovaL 8pav ; 
 
 £?E. Ovkovv ocroi ye tcov peydXcov ttov tl irXar- 
 tovctlv epycov rj ypd(f)ovo-LV. el yap ci7ro8L8olev ttjv 
 
 ing to all : at once special and 
 general, individual and univer- 
 sal. Compare Phaadr. 265-273. 
 7. 2u 8' aXX' eiVe] Cf. Xen. 
 
 Hell. III. 4, 26 : ArroKpivopevov 
 8e tov 'AyrjaiXdov, on ovk ay 
 TvoirjCTiu ravra civev ra>v o'Ikoi 
 re\£>v, 2u 5' aX\a, ecos av irv6y 
 ra irapa rrjs TroXeas, fiera^coprjcrov 
 e<pr], es TtjV <&apvaj3d£ov. 
 
 g. n)v eiKao-TLK7]v] The word 
 is used again in Legg. 2, 667 b: 
 ocrai rex vai clKtUTTuau. lb. 668 
 d : povo~ini)v — Traadv cpapev elua- 
 o~riKrp> re eivai K.a\ piprjri^v. 
 
 0. 6pcbv\ ra) 8110 Xeya IS 
 
 understood from the preceding 
 sentence. The ace. is governed 
 partly by Xe'yco, partly by 6p£>v. 
 r 13. t*}v tov piprjparos ykveo~iv\ 
 
 The word yepeo-is frequently 
 occurs in these dialogues with 
 something of a technical mean- 
 ing. Here it seems almost 
 pleonastic. Cf. Legg. 4, 712 
 
 a : rore TToXire'ias rijs cipiCTTTjs 
 cpverai ysvecris. Rep. 2, 37 I d : 
 Ka7TT]\a>v — yeveaiv. Compare 
 Cratyl. 432 c, where the fur- 
 ther distinction is drawn be- 
 tween KparvXov ei/cwj/ and 8vo 
 KparvXoi. 
 
 15. 7rai/Te? ol pipovpevol ri] 
 
 " All who try to imitate any- 
 thing." 
 
 16. iTTixtipovcri Spav almost = 
 
 bpSxri. Cf. Theaet. 196 d, Phsedr. 
 265 e, et passim. 
 
 17. irov\ "Anpvhere," "on 
 any occasion." 
 
78 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 The false 
 image is 
 that, in 
 whichthese 
 
 only seem 
 to be lire- 
 served, be- 
 cause of 
 the posi- 
 tion of the 
 spectator. 
 
 tcov kciXcov dXijOivijv avp/JieTpiav, oia&' on a/JLiKpo- p. 235. 
 repa fxev tov Se'ovTO? ra dvco, p.el(oo Se ru Karoo p. 236. 
 (f)aii>OLT dv Sid to to. /xev TvoppobQev, to. 8 eyyvOev 
 v(fi rjpicov bpdaOai. dp ovv ov yaipeiv to dXr/Oh 
 5 eacravTes 01 Srjpiiovpyol vvv ov tols ovaas avfipie- 
 Tpia?, dXXd tos dofjovaas elvai koAo? rois eiScoXois 
 evonrepyd(pvTai ; 
 
 0EAL Yldvv fxev ovv. 
 
 /HE. To fxev dpa erepov ov Sikciiov, eiKO? ye ov, 
 10 eiKova KaXelv ; 
 
 GEAI. No/. 
 
 S*E. Kou 7-779 ye \xipx\i iKr}<$ to eiri tovtco ixepos b 
 KXrjreov oirep emo\xev ev tco 7rp6o~0ev, eiKaaTiKTjv ; 
 
 GEAI. KXrjTeov. 
 J 5 SE. T/ oY; to (pa.ivop.evov p.ev Sid tt]V ovk e/c 
 
 1. tcov KaXmv] Badham conj. 
 kqSKcov, but cf. KaXas infra, 1. 6. 
 
 5. vvv] " In point of fact." 
 The position of tlie word is 
 curious. Cf. supr., 218 b : 
 
 ap)(op.evco rrpcoTov, cos epo\ cpaive- 
 rai, vvv dno tov aocpicrrov. 
 
 ras ovcras] tcov koKcov is pro- 
 bably to be supplied in thought. 
 
 8. ndw fxev ovv] These words 
 are not omitted in the Bod- 
 leian MS., as Gaisford asserts. 
 
 9. et/eds ye ov] ye = are, as 
 above, 2 2ic: to ye ovopa tovto 
 
 1 2. to eVl tovto] "Whose work 
 this is." Cf. Kep. 5,477 d : 8wd- 
 p.ecos 8' els eKelvo fiovov jSAeVeo, 
 e(fi' co Te eo-TL Kcil o dnepyd^eTai. 
 
 13. ev tco TrpoaBev] 235 d. 
 15. 81a ttjv ovk eK xakov 6iav] 
 
 Heindorf, following Schleier- 
 macher, called this reading- 
 senseless, and thought that ovk 
 had arisen out of ex. And ovk 
 
 is certainly omitted in Coisl. 
 
 2. Y., but Coisl. has e* KaXov 
 
 p.T)8ap.cos. Stallbaum agrees with 
 Heindorf, who renders £k Ka- 
 Xov, ex loco opportune and 
 quotes Aristoph. Thesm. 293 : 
 
 TTOV, TTOV KCtdlfap.' iv KClkcO TCOV 
 
 prjTopcov iv i^aKovoo. C. F. Her- 
 mann conjectures 81a ttjv ciko- 
 Xovdiav, " because of the con- 
 gruity" (it is rather the ap- 
 parent congruity) "of the 
 proportions." The difficulty 
 arises simply from misappre- 
 hension. The point is that 
 in addressing persons who are 
 at a distance from the truth 
 
 of things (jroppco ttjs dXi]delas 
 dcpeo-TcoTas, supr. 234 c) the 
 Sophist is able to give his 
 arguments the appearance of 
 wisdom. The unfavourable 
 position in which his hearers 
 stand is the cause of their 
 delusion, as in the case of the 
 
20<M2TH2. 
 
 79 
 
 p. 236. kolKov 6eav eoiKevai tco KaXco, Svvap.iv Se el tis Xdftoi 
 ra rrjAiKczvTa iKavcQ? opav, pr]8e el/eh? cb (prjalv ioi- 
 Kevai, tl KaXovptev ; dp ovk, eTreiirep (jmlverai p.ev, 
 €OiK€ 8e ov, (pdvrrxafxa ; 
 
 0EAI. T/ pyv ; 
 
 HE. Ovkovv Trd/jL7roXu koll Kara ryv £coypa(f)iav 
 c tovto rb fie'pos earl /ecu Kara ^vpuraaav pLip.r)TiKrjv ; 
 
 0EAI. Ilw $ ov ; 
 
 HE. Trjv 8r) (pavrdo-para aAA' ovk etKova direp- 
 ya^op.evi]v rey^vqv dp ov (pavTacrTiKrjV opOorar dv 
 Trpoaayopevoipev ; 
 
 0EAI. UoXv ye. 
 
 HE. Tovrco to'lvvv tco Svo eXeyov e'lSrj r??? elSco- 
 XoTTOUKrji; elKacfTLK-qv Ka\ (pavTacTTLKrjv. 
 
 5 
 
 Hence, 
 tli ere are 
 two kinds 
 
 of image- 
 making, 
 Likeness- 
 making 
 and Plian- 
 10 tastic, of 
 which 
 painting is 
 a conspicu- 
 ous ex- 
 ample. 
 
 apparent proportions of a co- 
 lossal statue. The words 86- 
 
 vap.iv 5" e'l tis Aa/3oi ra tt?/W- 
 Kavra Uavcos opav imply this, 
 and require that ovk should be 
 retained. " That which appears 
 to resemble what is fair be- 
 cause the spectator is not in a 
 fair position." Cf. Legg. 2, 
 663 c: o-Korobiviav — to iroppaj- 
 Qev dpwu.ei'oi/ — irapex el > vop,o6e- 
 tt]s 8e — to (tkotos dcpeXcov — 
 Treio-ci — cos eo-Kiaypa<pr]p.eva ra 
 8'iKaid eort (cat aSi/ca* ra pev d8iKa 
 tco tov SiKaiov evavTias (paivopeva, 
 Ik pev cISlkou Kal kcikou iauTou 
 0ewpouu,eya 7j8ia, ra 8e 8iKaia 
 anSea-repa, e< 8e 8iKaiov 7rdvra 
 rdvavria iravrr) irpbs dpcfiOTepa, 
 
 where it is evident from the 
 context, as here, (especially 
 from the word iroppadev,) that 
 <fk expresses position or point 
 of view : and there is perhaps 
 the same allusion as in Ar. 
 Eth. Nic. IX. 7 : 'Enlxappos 
 
 p.ev ovv rdx av < / )nt '7 Tavra ~\eyciv 
 avrovi £k irovqpov 6ecop.evovs : 
 unless indeed this is to be in- 
 terpreted from ejusd. Metaph. 
 XII. 9, 17 : x a ^ e7rov * K H-*l Ka ~ 
 \cos exovrcov \eyeiv koXcos, Kar 
 'Enixappov, where sk expresses 
 the material or means, as in 
 €K Ttov8e it none 1 Phsed. 67 e. 
 
 2 . ra T7]XiKavTa] " Things of 
 such colossal size." 
 
 q> (prjcriv eoiKe'vai] " Which 
 
 it professes to resemble." 
 3 xa\ovp.ev] Future tense. 
 
 (paiveTat pev\ eoiKevai, which 
 
 is added in one or two 
 MSS., is easily supplied from 
 eoiKe S' ov. Cf. supr. 233 b : 
 P-i]Te eKeivois ecpaivovTo, and note. 
 
 4. <pavTaapaTa] So the Bod- 
 leian and IT. : cett. <pdvTacrp.a. 
 The opposition between the 
 one real and the many appa- 
 rent likenesses suits the pas- 
 sage well. Cf. Rep. 7, 516 b. 
 
 13. tco 8vo] Supr. 235 d. 
 
80 
 
 nAATQNOS 
 
 Now in 
 seeking to 
 place the 
 Sophist in 
 one of 
 these, we 
 are en- 
 countered 
 by the dif- 
 ficulty 
 which has 
 always 
 beset the 
 subject of 
 appearance, 
 seeming, 
 and falsity. 
 
 GEAI. % Op6m. 
 
 HE. O Se ye koll tot r)/jL([jeyvouvv, ev iroTepa 
 
 tov aocjuaTr)v deTeov, ov8e vvv irco Svvap.cu Qedaa- 
 
 crOcu cracfxa?, aAA' ovtco? OavpaaTos dvyp kcu kcitl- 
 
 5 Selv TrayxaXeiros, eirel kcu vvv paXa ev kcu Kopyj/QJ? 
 
 €1? cnropov eiSos 8iepevvi]aaadai KaTcnre'cpevyev. 
 
 GEAI. "EoiK€i>. 
 
 HE. 'Ap' ovv avTO yLyvcocrKCov £vpL(prjs, y) ere 
 olov pvfJLT] ti?, V7TO tov Xoyov crvveiOicrpevov, vvv eire- 
 ocnrdcjcLTO irpo? to Tayy tjv/jL<pr)crai ; 
 
 GEAI. YIco?, kcu irpos o tl, tovto e'lprjKa? ; 
 
 aE. ' Ovtco?, co pLaKapie, ecrfiev ev TravTairacTi 
 
 yakeirfi aKe^/ei. to yap cpalveaOat tovto kcll to So- 
 
 Kelv, elvcu Se fir], kcu to Xeyeiv fiev cUttcx, dXrjOrj Se 
 
 1 5 fir), TrdvTOL tcwtcl Ictti [xecrTa chropias de\ ev tco 
 
 p. 236 
 
 2. kcu tot] Supr. 235 d. 
 TTOTepa] Bodl. iroTepa. 
 
 6. naTcnv£<pevyev\ The same 
 imagery occurs in Phileb. 64 
 
 e : vvv 8rj KaTcnrecpevyev rjp.lv 
 t6 dya&ov els ttjv tov koKov 
 cpvcriv. Phsed. 76 e : els koXov 
 KciTctcpevyei, 6 Xoyoy. The order 
 of the words is noticeable. 
 Aiepevvrjo-aaOai, which is intro- 
 duced by an afterthought, de- 
 pends immediately on anopov. 
 
 8. \p" ovv avTo — ] "Do you 
 give your assent intelligently, 
 or, from the habit of the argu- 
 ment, were you now drawn 
 on, as by a sort of impetus, 
 to assent at once 1" 
 
 9. vvv] This, the reading of 
 the Bodleian and An., is better 
 than crvve7recrndo-aTo, which has 
 arisen out of the preceding 
 verb. " Being accustomed by 
 the argument to assent, you 
 
 were now (this time) drawn 
 on to make a hasty admission." 
 
 11. n«s] "With what mean- 
 ing ?" 
 
 Ka\ -rrpbs o ti] " And with 
 reference to what ?" " What 
 is the special difficulty, which 
 you have in viewl" 
 
 o ti] The indirect form 
 may be accounted for by sup- 
 posing an ellipse of Xeye, and 
 appears more natural if the 
 words Kal npos oTi are viewed 
 as an afterthought. Cf. supr. 
 233 a : el iravTa — mO' ovTiva 
 k.t.X. Cf. also Legg. 12, 960 
 C : npos o ti 8e to vvv av p-qdev 
 e'ipr)Tai, (ppaf en cracpeo-Tepov. 
 Euthyd. 287b: to yap ovx e'xco 
 o ti xpSjLicu o ti 7T0Te Xe'yeis, a> 
 Aiovvcrodape ; One MS. (Flor. i) 
 has ti. 
 
 15. jieo-Ta] Ora. Bodl. 
 A 11. The v of io-Tiv was 
 
20<M2TH2. 
 
 81 
 
 p. 236. irpoaOev ^povco kcu vvv. ottcos yap eiirovTa ^pi] 
 \jsev8r) Xeyeiv tj So{ja(jeiv ovtcos eivai, kou tovto 
 (f)0eytjafi€vov ivavTiokoyia fi7] avve\eadai, TravTa- 
 p. 237. ttolctlv, (o ©ecar^re, yaXeirov. 
 0EAI. T* &$ ; 
 
 HE. TeToXprjK€i> 6 Xoyo? ovtos vTVoOicrOai to /jltj 
 ov elvar \jsev8os yap ovk av aXXoos lylyvero ov. Ylap- 
 /xevlSrjs Be 6 [leyas, co 7rai, Traicriv jiev \i]plv\ ovaiv. 
 
 first confused with the initial 
 p., and then the remaining 
 letters ecrra were lost. 
 
 (15.) e" t<5 7Tp6adev xpQ vt ? KCH 
 viv] Cf. These t. 187 c : Opdr- 
 
 rei pi 7Tcos vvv re Kal tiXXoTe 8f] 
 noKKcLKLS, <o(tt iv diropiq noXXfj 
 TTpbs ipavTbv Kill trpbs iiXXov ye- 
 yovivai, tl 7TOT cor! tovto to 
 nd6os nap' fjp.1v Kal riva rponov 
 eyyiyvopevov — to 8o£d£eiv rivd 
 yjsev8fj. 
 
 I. 07T0K — xaXe7rdV] " For 
 it is most difficult to devise 
 an expression by which one 
 may say or think that false- 
 hoods really exist, and in 
 uttering this avoid being in- 
 volved in self-contradiction." 
 XaXenov (yvcbvai or Xeyai') 0770)5 
 (InovTa xph Xeyeiv 17 do£d£eiv 
 \f/ev8rj ovtu>s eivai, Kal tovto 
 (fideytjdpevov ivavTioXoylq pf] o~v- 
 
 vex^o-Bai. Heindorf, who is 
 followed by Stallbaum, inter- 
 prets the words differently : 
 " Difficile enim prorsus est 
 dictu, quomodo oporteat ali- 
 quem, qui fieri posse cheat 
 (dwovTa) ut falsa quis dicat 
 aut cogitet, dum vel hoc pro- 
 
 nuntiat (*ai tovto (fideygdpevov) 
 
 non sibimet ipsum contraria 
 proloqui." Snas is here unna- 
 turally separated from elirovra : 
 xpn is too remote from the 
 
 infinitive o-vvixeo~8ai, and the 
 meaning given to Kal is forced. 
 
 For on-coy elnuvra XP*1 Xeyeiv, cf. 
 Legg. 4, 709 b : TO 6"' eCTTL — 
 ■ndvTa TavT tlnovra SoKelv ev 
 Xeyeiv. 
 
 3. o-vvexeo-dtu expresses the 
 state of distressing uncertainty 
 to which the mind .is reduced 
 by Eristic. Cf. Theset. 165 c : 
 
 iv (ppiaTi o-vvexopevos. Al". Eth. 
 Nic. VII. 3 : 8e8(Tui yap fj 8id- 
 voia, orav peveiv pev pfj fiovXrjTai 
 81a t6 pfj dpicrKeiv to o-vpirepav- 
 6ev, npoievai 8e pf] 8vvrjTai 8id to 
 pfj Xvaai e'xeiv tov Xoyov. 
 
 6. 6 Xo'yo? ovtos] Sc. \j/ev8ij 
 
 ovtcos elvai. Cf. Rep. 4, 440 a : 
 
 outos pevToi, ecprj, 6 Xoyos crrj- 
 paivei k.t.X. 
 
 8. Traicriv pev [fjpiv] ovcriv, dpxd- 
 pevos 8e Kal 8id Te'Xovs] " It was 
 
 in our boyhood that we heard 
 him, but he never ceased to 
 inculcate the same lesson." 
 The Stranger means to inti- 
 mate that although he was 
 young when he heard Parme- 
 nides he had good reason to 
 remember this warning, fjp'iv, 
 omitted in most MSS., is read 
 for pev in a B C i : S, with the 
 edition of Stephanas, giving 
 also ye for 8e. Hence Bekker 
 
 reads iraio-iv fjplv ovaiv dpxdpevos 
 re Kai 81a TeXovs. 
 
 For how 
 can we 
 
 afKnii the 
 existence of 
 these, with 
 
 out contra- 
 
 M 
 
dieting the 
 principle 
 which Par- 
 
 nienides 
 taught us, 
 
 ■' \\ I,:, I is 
 
 not, never 
 will be 
 found to 
 be?" 
 
 82 IIAATQNOS 
 
 apyppevos be kol Sict reXovs tovto uirepapTupaTO, p. 237. 
 neCr} re code eKaarore Xeycov kcu pera peTpcov' 
 
 ov yap fxti irore tovt iovSa/xf]^, <p)]rriv, eivai fxt) eovra' 
 akXa av tj/o"^' acjj 6S0O Sifyfxevos elpye vorjfia. 
 
 $irap eiceivov re ovv paprvpelrai, /cat paXtara ye brj b 
 irdvTcov 6 Xoyo? clutos av dijXcoaeie perpia fiacravL- 
 
 I . tovto dircfiapTvparo'] Sc. 
 pr) to pr) ov eivai. " Uttered 
 
 his testimony against this." 
 
 3. tovt ■fov8ap[f\-] The quo- 
 tation occurs in the same form 
 in the criticism of this passage 
 by Aristotle in Met. XIII. 
 1089 a (ullo modo, Bessar. 
 vers.), with the various read- 
 ings 8aprj E., dvvdpei T., pr) 
 8aprj Alex. Heindorf's conjec- 
 ture, 8afjs, has been adopted 
 by the Zurich editors, and by 
 Mullach (Fragmenta Philoso- 
 phorum), who, however, ex- 
 presses a doubt. Wagner, in 
 Ehein. Museum, suggested Xd- 
 Xrjs. The conjecture iacvf has 
 occurred independently to the 
 present editor and to Ueber- 
 weg, who also suggests 6V 
 pf/s. Cf. infr. 250 e : xad' 
 
 dnep av avratv Sarepov e'ire dpv- 
 8porepov eire o-acpeaTepov am- 
 <J>ateT|Tai, Kcii BaTepov ovtos dfa- 
 4>aii/ea0ai. 258 d (where the 
 lines are quoted again) : 'Hpe'is 
 
 8e ye ov povov a>s eo~Ti to. pr) ovra 
 dne8ei£apev, dXXd Kal to ei8os 6 
 Tvy%dvei ov tov pr) ovtos airefyv)- 
 vdp.eQo.. lb. e : Mr) to'ivvv r)pds 
 e'iirrf tls oti rovvavTiov tov ovtos 
 to pr) ov 6.Tzo^>a\.v6p.evoi To'Xpai- 
 pev \eyeiv cb? scttiv. lb. a : r) 
 QaTepov (pvo-is €$&vr\ TCOV OVTCOV 
 
 ovo-a. Legg. 7, 818 b : oi8e 
 
 6ebs dvdyxr] pr) tvots (pavr/ paxo- 
 
 pevos. Kep. 7, 525 e : pij 
 
 7tot€ (pavjj. Karsten, followed 
 by Stallbaum, defends the text 
 on the ground that Parmeni- 
 des is said to have given the 
 maxim both in verse and 
 prose. But it is puerile to 
 imagine that he spoke verse 
 and prose in the same breath, 
 or that Plato would quote a 
 conversational as part of a 
 written utterance. It is cer- 
 tainly remarkable that the 
 same corruption should be 
 found in the copies of Plato 
 and Aristotle. 
 
 4. Sitfpevos] This is the 
 reading of all the MSS. in 
 this place. In the later pas- 
 sage, 258 d, where the words 
 are again quoted, 8i(,r)pevos is 
 read in C. H. and Corr. B. : 
 
 S. has Si^o-tos : the rest 8i£r)- 
 o-ios. The latter is probably 
 Parmenides' word ; but it is 
 possible that Plato may have 
 substituted the more prosaic 
 8i(r)p(vos for this, as in Theaet. 
 173 e, in the quotation from 
 Pindar, (peperai is probably 
 substituted for 7reVerat. The 
 MS. reading is, therefore, re- 
 tained in the text. 
 
 6. 6 Xdyos avTos] ovtos Bodl. 
 rAHet pr. B. But see Theaet. 
 151 a, avTol, and note. The 
 variation is probably due to 
 6 Xdyos ovtos above. 6 Xdyos, 
 
20<M2TH2. 
 
 83 
 
 o. 237. adds, tovt ovv avrb wpcDTov 6eacrcope6a, el prj ri 
 aoi 8ia(pe'p€i. 
 
 GEAI. To fM€U epbv birrj (BovAei ri6eao i rbv 8e 
 \6yov, f) (3e/\Ti(TTa 8t€^eicn, ctkottcov avro? re 16 1 
 Kajj.€ Kara Tavrrju Tr\v o8ov aye. 5 
 
 S*E. 'AAAa -%pr] 8pav ravra. kcli pot Xeye- to 
 prjSapcos bv roXpwpev ttov (f)6eyyea6ai ; 
 
 0EAI. rTajy yap ov ; 
 
 SE. M77 tolvvv epi8os k'vefca p.r/8e ira&ias, aAA' 
 c el o~7rov8fj 8eoi avvvorjcravTa riva airo(^r\vao~6ai twv 10 
 aKpoarcou, irol xprj rovvop! imtyepeiv tovto to p.rf ov 
 
 Let us 
 calmly 
 consider 
 this point, 
 by analyz- 
 ing the 
 assertion— 
 " Not- 
 Beiu" is." 
 
 VIZ. to fj.f] ov eivai. For avros av 
 
 8t]\wo-(u, cf. Theset. 201 a: rax 
 
 &v — qvt6 (fyfjveie to fyrovptvov. 
 3. To pev epov 07177 /3ovXei] 
 
 Referring to the courteous 
 phrase ei pr] ri aoi Stafa'pei. 
 Cf. Rep. 4, 432 b : idv fioi ino- 
 peva xPH Ka ' r< * demvvpeva 8v- 
 vapevcp KuOopav, Tvdvv perpicos 
 Xpwei. And, for SUgeio-i, cf. 
 Rep. 6, 484 a : did paKpov twos . 
 8ie£e\86vTOS \6yov. 
 
 7. (p6eyyeo-6ai\ " We are not 
 afraid to use the expression." 
 Cf. Legg. 2, 655 d : tovto— oiff 
 
 oo~iov to irapcmav (pBeyyeadai. 
 
 9. Mfj tolvvv 7ratSia?] Cf. 
 
 Theffit. 155 a: ov 8vo-Ko\aivov- 
 Tfs dXha r<5 ovti rjpas civtovs 
 e£eTa£ovTes. ib. 1 69 C : kcli poi 
 ttclvv Trjpet to Toiovde, prj ttov 
 ttuiSikov ti \ddapev elSos Ta>v 
 
 \6yoov Troiovpevot. The words 
 here are not ironical, but 
 mark the real importance of 
 the inquiry. The sentence is 
 broken by the introduction 
 of the supposition, " Let us 
 not put the question in a 
 spirit of strife or mockery, 
 but suppose one of the hear- 
 
 M 
 
 ers of Parmenides had seri- 
 ously to point out, after re- 
 flection, to what this name 
 Not-Being must be given, 
 to what object or kind of 
 objects do we imagine he 
 would be able himself to ap- 
 ply the term, and to direct the 
 questioner to do so ?" Par- 
 menides is conceived as thus 
 questioning one of his hearers 
 in defence of his thesis. It is 
 also possible to make the first 
 clause a part of the supposi- 
 tion : " Suppose one of the 
 hearers were asked, not in a 
 spirit of strife or mockery, 
 but in good earnest, to give 
 his matured opinion." But the 
 sentence when thus rendered, 
 though more grammatical, is 
 less conversational. Compare 
 Phileb. 44 e : Set 8ij <re, & npa>- 
 Tapxe, Kaddnep e' ( uoi, kol tovtois 
 toIs 8vo-x(palvovo-Lv d-TTOKpiveardai. 
 
 Rep. 7, 516 e. 
 
 IO. dTTO(pr)vaadai] The Bodl., 
 with corr. AIJ and pr. BE, has 
 drroKpivao-daL, which is probably 
 a corruption arising out of the 
 Kp in aKpoaTchv. 
 
84 
 
 OAATONOS 
 
 If Parme- 
 nides had 
 
 asked, Of 
 what is 
 Non-exist- 
 ence pre- 
 dicable? 
 what 
 should we 
 reply ? 
 
 Certainly 
 not of any 
 
 fyeiv 8oKovfj.€i> av els ti kcll hr\ ttolov uvtov re Kara- p. 237. 
 \pi)craor6(u koll tco irvvOavofievoy deiKvvvai ; 
 
 GEAI. XaXtwbv rjpov kcu aryebbv ebrelp oico ye 
 ejjioi iravTairaaLv airopov. 
 5 aE. AAA' ovv tovto ye 8r)\ov, otl tg>v ovtcov 
 
 e7TL TL TO (XT) OV OVK olcTTeOV- 
 
 GEAI. TIcos yap av ; 
 
 HE- Ovkovv eirehrep ovk €7rl to ov, ovS" eVt to 
 t\ (pepcov 6p6w av tls (pepoi. 
 to GEAI. nm 8j ; 
 
 SiE. Kal tovto rj/jLiv ttov (pavepov, cbs Ka\ to tl d 
 
 1. exeiv] The Bocll. and 
 Vat. have ™ : six other MSS. 
 oti : Veil. II. ti' ex etv '• ^ e 
 other nine have *x&,v. Stall- 
 baum has adopted the Bod- 
 leian reading, and translates : 
 " Quid censemus ? cuinam rei 
 et quali designando eum pu- 
 tamus et ipsum illud adhibi- 
 turum et quserenti demon- 
 straturum V But he has not 
 satisfactorily accounted for the 
 appearance of e'xeiv, which 
 makes perfectly good sense. 
 For the emphatic position of 
 els ti, cf. Prot. 3 1 8 d : 'imvoKpd- 
 ttjs — fiekriav aneicri yevojievos Kal 
 — eTTidaxrei els ti, &> Upcorayopa, 
 Kai nepl tov ; also Polit. 265 
 e : 6 7to\itik6s ap enijxeXeiav 
 e\ elv <pa'iveTai TTOTepct k. t. A. 
 
 The two next clauses present 
 equally curious instances of 
 inversion. Cf. alsoLegg. 6, 776 
 
 d : els a Kal Travra rot roiavra 
 (B\e\fsavTas rjpas ti XPI iroieiv 
 Ttepl KTrjO-ecos oltceraiv ; 
 
 2. beiKvvvai] Sc. ins XP €lr l 
 emcfiepeiv. 
 
 5. 'AAX' ovv tovto ye] I. e. 
 
 to whatever else the term p.rj 
 
 ov may be referred, it cannot 
 be to any existing thing. 
 
 tSjv ovtcov eni ti ] The 
 reading of Ven. II. and seven 
 other MSS. The Bodleian 
 has enT . 
 
 8. ovcf em to t\ cpepcov] Cf. 
 for similar examples of ex- 
 treme analysis, Parm. 161 a : 
 
 el 8e to ev eKelvo Kai p.rj aWo 
 xiTTOKelTai fxrj elvat Kal tov eKeivov 
 Kal aWcov ttoWcov dvdyKT] avTco 
 
 P-erelvai. Theset. 1 57 b, 202 a. 
 Also Parm. 164 b: rl 8e ; to 
 
 eKeivov rj to eKeivco, rj to ti fj to 
 tovto rj r6 tovtov, r) aXXov fj 
 aXhco, rj TTore rj eireiTa rj vvv, 
 rj eirio~Tr)fj.rj r) 86£a fj a'io~8r)0~is rj 
 Xoyos rj ovopa rj ciXXo otiovv t£>v 
 ovtcov nepl to p.r) ov e(TTai ; 
 
 which, however, is rather par- 
 allel to the next dnopia. 
 
 1 1. Kai tovto rjplv ttov (pavepov\ 
 " This also is surely plain to 
 us." Kal refers to tout-o ye 8r]\ov 
 above. 
 
 to t\ tovto pTjp-aJ This 
 word " something." pr)p.a seems 
 to be thrown in by an after- 
 thought, for the sake of ex- 
 plicitness ; so giving ri the 
 
20<I>I2TH2. 
 
 85 
 
 p. 237. tovto prjfia iir ovtl Xeyopav e/caVrore" povov yap being— noi 
 
 » \ .. / cf \ \> / , \ of BO] 
 
 avro Xeyeiv, wairep yvp,vov kcli airi]pr)p(op.evov utto thing. F01 
 dSv 
 
 tcov ovtcov airavTwv, aovvarov. 77 yap ; • 
 
 GEAI. 'ASvvarov. 
 
 HE. 3^/)a 7-f;<5e aKOirwv ^v/JL(f)7js &>? dvdyKrj tov 5 
 rt XeyovTa ev ye tl XeyeLv ; 
 
 GEAI. OiW *•* 
 
 ^E- 'E^o? ya/5 6\; ro ye tl (fyrjaeLS 1 arjpelov eivai, 
 to 8e Tive 8volv, to 8e Tives iroXXwv. 
 
 GEAI. Ilcoy yap ov ; 10 
 
 e aE. Toy 5e 5;; //r; ri XeyovTa avayKaiOTarov, 639 
 eoiK€, iravTCLTTacri p.r)8ev XeyeLv. 
 
 GEAI. AvayKaioTaTOV p.ev ovv. 
 
 HE. , Ap ovv ov8e tovto crvyytopryreov, to tov tol- 
 ovtov Xeyeiv pkv fTif, Xeyeiv pkvTOi pr)8ev, «AA' oi>8e 15 
 Xeyeiv (fiaTeov, bs y av eiri^eipfi p.rj ov (pfleyyeaOai ; 
 
 implies 
 
 being. Bat 
 •• aot-Bome ' 
 is '• none,* 1 
 and to 
 
 s|K-ak none 
 is not to 
 
 GEAI. Te'Aoy yovv av diropias 6 Adyoy e^ot. 
 
 There fol- 
 lows a 
 
 force of an adjective, as in such 
 expressions as 17 AiVoAi? avrrj 
 ywT]. Heindorf conjectures rh 
 pfjfia, which appears in two 
 MSS. Stallbaurn renders prjpa 
 eV ovri " as a predicate of 
 being." 
 
 15. Xeyeiv [pev] frif] Tl, which 
 
 appears in all the MSS., is not 
 wanted, and, if genuine, is 
 used in common parlance (cf. 
 Slipr. 236 e, Xeyeiv pev arret) 
 without reference to the pre- 
 ceding argument, just as the 
 ordinary sense of eivai, 8oKe1v, 
 etc., is often found within a 
 few lines of the technical use 
 of the same words, pev, which 
 the Bodleian (not however Vat. 
 A.) omits, is probably right, 
 though the omission may be 
 
 defended from Theset. 160 b : 
 alaBavopevov yap, pr]8ev6s 8e 
 alaBavopevov. lb. : yXvKv yap, 
 pr]8ev\ 8e y'KvKv. 
 
 pr]8ev] I. e. pr]8e ev. The 
 
 argument from pfj rolvw may 
 be thus resumed. — What is 
 denoted by pfj ov 1 No exist- 
 ing thing: and therefore not 
 something : for every " some- 
 thing" exists : therefore, 6 pr) 
 
 ov Xeywv ov n Xe'yet. But 
 
 every something is some one 
 thing : therefore, 6 ptj re Xe- 
 
 yav oi8ev Xe'yet. But (6 ou8ev 
 
 Xeyav) he who says nothing, 
 does not say at all : there- 
 fore 6 p.x) ov Xeycov oi8e Xe'yet. 
 Compare Parm. 144 c, Thewt. 
 189 e. 
 
 17. TeXo? yovv av dnopias 6 
 
80 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 graver dif- 
 ficulty. If 
 
 Not-Being 
 is ii,.t pra- 
 cticable, 
 
 neither is 
 aught pre- 
 dicable of 
 the non- 
 existent. 
 And yet 
 Not-Being 
 cannot be 
 utteivd 
 or even 
 thought, 
 without 
 implying 
 predicates, 
 such as 
 unity or 
 plurality, 
 which im- 
 ply num- 
 ber, which 
 implies 
 being. 
 
 SE. Mi]7rco p.ey ehrr}? eri yap, co paKapie, eaTi, p. 238 
 K.a\ ravra ye twv airopiwv rj fieylaTT) koll irptoTT]. 
 7T€pl yap avrr)v avrov tt\v dp~)Q~\v ovaa TvyyaveL. 
 
 0EAI. rico? (jyfjs ; Xeye K.a\ pLrjbev diroKVYjar)?. 
 
 5 hhE. Tw fX€V OVTL 7TOV TTpOdyivOLT O.V TL T(OV 
 
 ovtwv erepov. 
 
 GEAI. II w? yap ov ; 
 
 SE. Mrj ovtl 8e tl tcou ovTwv dpa irpoay'tyve- 
 crOaL (jyrjcrofxev SvvaTov elvaL ; 
 o GEAI. Kat Trco^ ; 
 
 £?E. 'Apidpov 8r/ tov ^vpiravTa twv ovtcov TL0epLev. 
 
 GEAI. Ei ne'p ye /ecu aAAo tl OeTeov w? ov. b 
 
 3*E. Mr) tolvvv fir]S eiTLyeLpcopLev apL0p.ov /jLrjTe 
 ttXyjOos p-?)Te to ev 7rpo$ to pa] bv irpoo~(pepeLV. 
 
 Xdyos ex 01 ] ° ~koyos, SC. to prj 
 ov eiuai, as appears from avrov 
 (sc. tov \6yov) below. " The 
 saying must surely be thus 
 reduced to the last stage of 
 difficulty." 
 
 I. Mtjttco pey einr}s\ There 
 is a tragic tone in the expres- 
 sion. Cf. Legg. 1, 638 a : 2> 
 
 apiare, prj \eye ravra. 
 
 S naKapie] "My simple friend !" 
 
 Cf. Crat. 414c: & paKapie, ovk 
 oiad' on K.r.X. 
 
 ecrri] Sc. dnopia, to be sup- 
 plied from dnopiav below. 
 
 3. nep\ airrju avrov rrp> dpyi]v\ 
 
 One which affects the very be- 
 ginning of the whole matter, 
 i. e. enters into the substance of 
 the term itself, pr\ ov. Cf. 
 
 SUpr. 233 d : rrjv dpxrjv — tov 
 
 \e\6(vros — dyvoe'is. The diffi- 
 culty is this : the word pr/ op 
 or jitJ7 ovra cannot be uttered 
 or thought without a contra- 
 diction : for JU17 ov has num- 
 
 ber, being singular, and prj 
 ovra has also number, being 
 plural : and number is exist- 
 ence : therefore, in uttering 
 or thinking the word prj bv 
 or p-r] 6vra we attach existence 
 to non-existence. In the for- 
 mer dnopla it was shewn that 
 non-existence could not be an 
 attribute. Here it is denied 
 that non-existence can be the 
 subject of any attribute : and 
 yet the word cannot be ut- 
 tered without implying attri- 
 butes, such as unity or plu- 
 rality. Cf. Parm. 164 b, quoted 
 above, note on p. 84, 1. 8. 
 
 12. El' irep ye <a\ a'XXo rt] I.e. 
 
 That is most real of which we 
 have the most distinct con- 
 ception, and our conception 
 of number is most distinct. 
 This is one of the Pythago- 
 rean or later Platonic touches, 
 which become more frequent in 
 the Politicus. 
 
20<S>I2TH2. 87 
 
 >. 238. 0EAI. Ovkovv av bpOm ye, &>? eoiKev, e7ri\€L- 
 poipLev, coy (f)i]aiv Aoyoy. 
 
 SE. II go? ovv av i) Sid tov CTTopaTO? (jyQey^aiT 
 dv TL9 r) kcu rfj Siavola to Traparrav Xafioi ra prj 
 bvTa 7] to p.7] bv \c0p\9 dpi6\x.ov ; 5 
 
 0EAI. Aeye, irrj ; 
 
 HE. M?) cWa yue^ iireiftav XeycopLtv, dpa ov 7rXrj- 
 c 009 iin)(eLpovfxev dpi6p.ov •KpoarTiQevai ; 
 
 0EAI. Tifirji;; 
 
 HE. Mt; 6f oV, a/?a ou ro et> av ; 10 
 
 0EAI. ^a(j)eaTaTa ye. 
 
 HE. Kai /u?)i> oi>Ve SiKaiov ye out bpObv (pap.ev 
 bv eirixeipelv pcrj bvn ivpoaappoTTeiv. 
 
 GEAI. Aeyeis- dXrjOeaTaTa. 
 
 HE. Hvvvoels ouz> co? oure <])0e'y£ao-0ai hvvaTov 15 Not-Being 
 
 > /> ~ v>»- >/ <> /1- v v A >^ is therefore 
 
 opucos ovt enreiv ovTe biavorjuiivai to par) ov avTO unutter- 
 
 /!> > / >.. ^> v j (j, / /• v v v able and 
 
 KaU avTO, aXX eaTiv aoiavoqTOv re /cat apprjTOV Kai inconceiv- 
 
 v 1 /1 \ v» able. 
 
 acptreyKTOv Kai aXoyov ; 
 
 0EAI. YlavTairacri p.ev ovv. 
 el £?E. 'A/)' ouf ey^evadparjv apTi Xeycov tyjv peyi- 20 But the 
 
 j , , , „ , greatest 
 
 ar^f airopiav epeiv avTov Trepi ; paradox is 
 
 0EAI. Tt be ; eri pLel^co tlvol Xeyetv aXXrjv hind. 
 
 expfiev ; 
 
 HE. Tt oV, d> OavpLaaie ; ou/c evvoels avTOi? toIs 
 
 10. /xjj ov fie] Sc. eVetSai/ Xe- to speak of using it as a predi- 
 ycofiev. cate or subject. 
 
 15. Svwoei?] "Do you gather 17. ddiavorjTov k.t.X.] " TJn- 
 or collect" (as the sum of the thinkable, unspeakable, unut- 
 preceding remarks). terable, and indescribable." 
 
 16. 6p6ms\ Cf. 6p86v supr. 20. r Ap ovv] " Was I then 
 That it can be uttered appears wrong in saying just now that 
 from our using the expression. I would tell you the greatest 
 Cf. supr. 237 b : to fxr)8aix£>s ov difficulty 1 " I. e. A greater is 
 ToXfiatpfv nov (pBe'yy(0~6ai. behind. 
 
 avro naO* a\)To\ T. e. Not 24. Ti 6V, u> 6avpao-ie~\ I. e. 
 
88 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 As Not- 
 Being 
 cannot be 
 
 asserted or 
 receive at- 
 tributes, so 
 neither can 
 Not-Being 
 lie denied. 
 For in say- 
 ing " it is 
 unspeak- 
 able," &c, 
 we attri- 
 bute Being 
 to it, and 
 also unity: 
 which this 
 very word 
 "it" im- 
 plies. 
 
 XeyOelarLV otl /cat tov eXey^ovTa ety airoplav kolOl- p. 238. 
 cm;o"t to fit] bv ovtcos cotrre, ottotolv civto eTriyeipf) 
 tls eAe'yxetv, evavTia avrhv avTco irep\ emelvo dvay- 
 Ka^eaQai Xeyeiv ; 
 5 GEAI. Ylco? <firj? ; erne en cracfieaTepov. 
 
 HE. Ovdev Set to craffieaTepov iv ep.o\ aKoirelv. 
 eyco /xev yap vTroOepcevos ovt€ evbs ovTe tgov ttoXXu>v c 
 to per] bv Selv fieTe^eiv, apTi tc /cat vvv ovtco? ev avTo 
 elprjKa' to /it?) bv yap (f)r]pLi. Ijvviei? tol ; 
 10 GEAI. Nat. 
 
 HE. Kat firjv at) /cat a/JUKpov epurpoaOev a(fi6ey- 
 ktov T6 avTo /cat ap'pyrrov /cat aXoyov e(fiy]v elvai. 
 ^vveirei ; 
 
 GEAI. £?lW7T0/xat 7TCOS. 
 
 *5 3?E. Ovkovv to ye eivai Trpoo~aTtTeiv ireipcdpLevos 
 evavTia tols TTpoaOev eXeyov ; 
 
 " I am surprised that you do 
 not see." 
 
 (24.) avTois rots XexOelaiv] 
 Either the dative is governed 
 by ev in iwoels, " Do you not 
 see that this is implied even in 
 what has been said?" cf. supr. 
 
 223 C, ev rot? TrpooSev elprjpevois 
 cpdvTaapa 7rapex eTaL /c.r.X. j or 
 (Heind. Stallb.) avTols toIs Xe- 
 xOelaiv = Kai en to>v \i\6ivrav. 
 
 Cf. Xen. Cyrop. 8, 1, 37 : rois 
 
 npoetprfpevois 8fj\ov. 
 
 I . Kai tov e\eyxovTa\ " Not- 
 Being reduces its opponent, 
 equally with its supporter, 
 to the same straits," i. e. 
 can neither be asserted nor 
 denied. In the spirit of the 
 Parmenides, Plato here points 
 out that Not-Being neither is 
 nor is not. Compare also 
 Theretetus, 183 a, b. This ar- 
 
 gument has an important bear- 
 ing on the whole dialogue. 
 The impossibility of criticising 
 Not-Being when conceived ab- 
 solutely leads to the necessity 
 of modifying the conception of 
 Negation. 
 
 3. inelvo] This pronoun is 
 used for the sake of distinct- 
 ness to prevent the further 
 repetition of avros with refer- 
 ence to a different subject. 
 
 8. apri] Supr. els anopiav ko.6- 
 icrTrjO'i to fir) ov. 
 
 vvv ovtois] Viz. in the pre- 
 vious clause, to fir) ov 8eiv pere- 
 X eiv. 
 
 9. gwiets tol ;] " You surely 
 understand V Cf. Theeet. 155c: 
 enei yap ttov, 2> 0. rt £2Yb, 
 whence Stallb. ti. Cf. Men. 
 76 d : gvves toi Xe'yco (Pind.) 
 
 15. to ye elvai] This refers, 
 
20<M2TH2. 
 
 89 
 
 0EAI. Qaivu. 
 
 HE. TV' 6Y ; roDro TrpoaairTCdv ov\ a>s eVi &eAe- 
 yopqv ; 
 
 GEAI. No/. 
 
 HE. Kat /x?)^ akoyov re Aeycoi' /cat appi]TOu /cats 
 acfyOeyKTOf coy ye 7rpoy ef rot' Aoyoy i7roLov/j.rji>. 
 
 0EAI. rico? 5' ou; 
 
 HE. Oa/xeV 6V ye Se?/^, ewre/o 6p6m ti? Ae'^et, 
 /^re cos* ev p.r)re coy 7roAA« Siopl^eiv avro, [irjSe to 
 Trapdirav clvto kolXuv' evbs yap e'ldec kol koto, two- io 
 tt)v av rrjv irpoaprjaiv irpoaayopevoiTO. 
 
 not, as Stallbaum says, to the 
 preceding predicates generally, 
 but to the word elvat in the 
 previous sentence and eo-Tiv 
 supra. 
 
 (l6.) ivavr'ia to'ls Tvp6(r6ev\ 
 Supr. 238 a : Mr) ovti &<=' rt to>v 
 bvrav dpa npocryLyfeadai (ptjcropev 
 dvvarov elvai \ Kal nibs ' } 
 
 2. tovto irpo<Ta.TTTaiv\ " In the 
 
 act of applying Being to Not- 
 Being, I addressed the latter 
 as one" viz. in using the sin- 
 gular verb ea-riv : supr. c. evl 
 is governed by 8ie\ey6p.r)v, not, 
 as Stallb. says, by Trpoo-dnTav 
 understood. " Did I not talk 
 
 with it as One 1 " 8i.a\e'yeodai is 
 
 substituted, with a touch of 
 liveliness, for 7rpoo-ayopevetv. 
 
 9. firjc)e to irapd-rvav auTO kci- 
 \eiv\ Cf. Theset. 202 a : ovoe 
 
 to uvto ov§e to eKelvo ov8e to 
 eKucrTov ovde to pdvov ovde tovto 
 Trpoo~oio~Teov, ovb aWa ttoWci tol- 
 avTa. 
 
 10. ivos yap e'l8ei] So Bodl. 
 and A, the rest vary between ev 
 
 re yap e'iSei (rABC, C01T. n. 
 pr. EF), ev ts yap etbei (S2YH), 
 and ev re yap fj8rj (i 1 pr. II 1 
 
 edd. vett.), whence Heindorf 
 conjectured ev n yap fJSrj, 
 which Bekker has adopted. 
 This deserves to be considered 
 as possibly right : especially 
 since the technical appearance 
 of ct'Sei, when this had once 
 crept in, might give rise to 
 further corruption. But »? 
 seems to be required to com- 
 plete the sentence as it would 
 then stand : and the Bodleian 
 reading is therefore here re- 
 tained. It is unnecessary to 
 add ev with the Zurich editors : 
 the expression ivos e?8ei Tvpoo-- 
 
 ayopevecrdai = " to be spoken of 
 
 under a form of unity," is 
 
 analogous to ova pari or Xo'yffi 
 npoo-ayopeveo-0ai. Cf. Thea't. 
 148 d : aanep ravras — evl et'osi 
 TTepie"\a(3es, ovt<o Kal tus hri- 
 crTTjpas ev\. Xoyw irpoCTenreie. 
 lb. I47 d : o~vWa$elv els ev. 
 OTW Trpoo-ayopeuaop.ev — Tas 8vvd- 
 
 p.eis. Compare also Phileb. 
 64 e : el pr) jxia 8vvdp.e6a ioia 
 to dyadov drjpevaai. 
 
 Kal Kara ravTr/v tt)v 7rpoo~- 
 
 prjo-iv] Viz. in being called avTo. 
 This note, like some of the 
 
 N 
 
yo 
 
 TIAATONOS 
 
 But let the 
 youthful 
 might of 
 Thetetetus 
 
 0EAI. YlavTairaaL ye. p. 239, 
 
 HE. Tov ptev tolvvv epe ye en Tis civ Xeyoi ; b 
 koll yap ttolXul kou ra vvv rjTTrjpLevov av evpot irept 
 tov tov prj ovtos eXeyypv. coare ev eptoiye XeyovTi f 
 KaOa-irep eiwov, pi) aKoircopev ttjv opdoXoyiav 7rep\ 
 to pi] bv, dXX' ela Si], vvv ev ao\ aKe\j/cop.eda. 
 
 0EAI. Ilwy (pfc ; 
 
 SE. ' Wl r}piv ev kcu yevvalcos, are veo9 cov, rt 
 p.dXicna duvaaai avvrelvas 7reipd0rjTi, payre ovcriav 
 
 preceding, would have been 
 unnecessary, but for that of 
 ►Stallbaum, who renders : "Si 
 modo nomine aliquo designe- 
 tur." 
 
 2. Tov epe] Cf. Theset. 166 a, 
 Phileb. 20 b. 
 
 tis &v \eyoi ;] " Who would 
 any longer take account of 
 me ? " This reading is sup- 
 ported by nine MSS. (Bodl. 
 e/zereTtris), and is preferable to 
 that of the editions : tL tis av 
 \eyoi. But if the latter is ac- 
 cepted, it means not " what 
 is to be said of me ?" but 
 "why should any one speak 
 of," or " take account of, me ?" 
 Cf. SUpr. 224 a, Xeyapev, and 
 note. 
 
 3. Kai — ndXat, Kai Tavvv] Cf. 
 Theeet. 187 d : OpaTTei p.e iras 
 vvv re Kai aWore noXXaKis, ioo~Te 
 ev anopiq TroWfj Trpbs epavTov Kai 
 irpbs ak\ov yeyovevat k.t.A. 
 
 4. ev epoiye \eyovri — ev (rot] 
 
 " Let us not study from my 
 mouth the right mode of ex- 
 pression about Not-Being, but 
 let us make the experiment 
 on you." Cf. Rep. 5, 475 a : 
 
 El (3ov\ei, e(pr), eV epov Xiyeiv. 
 
 5. Kaddtrep eirruv] Viz. SUpr. : 
 Ov8ev 8ei to aa<fieo~T(pov e'v epol 
 
 o-Kone'iv. Perhaps in Xe'yovri 
 
 there is a false echo from Xeyot. 
 
 6. eta 8rj] So Si, with the 
 
 old editions. The expression 
 
 is "tragic," like Mtjttco pey e'livqs, 
 
 supr. 238 a ; and does not ap- 
 pear too strong when compared 
 with what immediately follows. 
 The reading of most MSS., ea 
 trj, is less spirited, and the con- 
 struction ea o-KetyiopeOa is ques- 
 tionable. 
 
 8. "idt — avToi] "You have 
 all the noble enthusiasm of 
 youth. Come then, endeavour 
 with all your might to make 
 some right utterance about 
 Not-Being, without attaching 
 to it either substance or unity 
 or plurality." " I should be 
 possessed with a strange eager- 
 ness in making the attempt 
 were I to try my hand when 
 I see you in such extremity." 
 
 are veos &>v — neipadr/Tij For 
 
 a slightly different touch of 
 ironical playfulness, (turning 
 on the easiness and not, as 
 here, on the difficulty of the 
 question asked,) cf. Phileb. 65 b: 
 
 fi\e\j/as els Tpia, vovv Ka\ dXrjdeiav 
 Kai T]8ovr]v, noXvv emo-ftcM xpovov, 
 anoKpivai aavTa k.t.X. 
 
 9. p'/re ovcriav — avrov] Com- 
 
20$I2TH2. 
 
 91 
 
 p- 239 
 
 firjTe to ev fjLrjre irXrjQos aptOpLOv TrpoaTiOeh rw /xy 
 ovtl, Kara to 6p6ov ^OeyfacrOai tl 7repl avTov. 
 
 0EAI. rioAA?) \xlvr av p.e koli aToiros e^pi irpo- 
 Ovfila tyjs €7nxeipr)ae(o^, el ae Totavfr opcov iraayovTa 
 ai)TO$ eTnyeipoLrjv. 5 
 
 HE. 'AAA' el 8oKel, ae /lev Kal ep.e yaipeiv ecoptev' 
 ems 5' av tlvi 8vvap.eva> 8pav tout evTvyxavcoptev, 
 pL^XP L T0VT0V XeycopLev co? iravros pLaWov iravovp- 
 ycos els anropov 6 ao<piaTr)9 tottov KaTaSedvKev. 
 
 0EAI. Kat paXa 81] (palveraL. i« 
 
 HE. Toiyapovv el riva (^-qaofiev avTov €)(eiv (f)av- 
 TacrTiK^v Teyyrfv, pa&iws ex. TavTrjs rrjs XP eLa ^ r ® v 
 Xoycov avTiXai.ifiav6p.evos rjptcov els Tovvavrlov airo- 
 
 pare Parmen. 1 6 1 a : el pevroi 
 
 firjTe to ev firjT enelvo pr) eaTai, 
 ak\a irepl SXKov tov 6 Adyoy, 
 oi>8e (pde'yyecrdai 8e1 ovBeV el 8e 
 to ev eitelvo Kal pr] tiXko vnoKeiTat, 
 pr) elvai, kol tov exeivov Ka\ SXKcoP 
 ttoWwv avayKT) avTci peTe'ivai. 
 
 2. KaTa to 6p66v\ Cf. Thepet. 
 
 1 7 1 C : a8rjkov el kol ■napaQeo- 
 
 fiev to 6p66v. Several MSS. 
 
 have Kara tov dpdov \6yov. 
 
 3. 7rpo6vpia tt)S eTTixeipr]0-eas] 
 
 Lit. " forwardness in attempt- 
 ing :" gen. of respect. Cf. 
 
 Phaedo 99 b : noXXrj av Ka\ pa- 
 Kpa padvpia etr) tov Xoyov. 
 
 8. TravTos pdXkov Ka.Ta8e8vK.ev] 
 " lias with unparalleled cunning 
 hid himself in a very trouble- 
 some cover." Cf. Rep. 4, 432 
 C : 8vo~(3aTos ye tis 6 tottos (pai- 
 verai Kal enlo-KLos' eo-ri yovv ctko- 
 reivos Kal 8vo-8upevvr]Tos. aX\a 
 yap opas foeov. 
 
 II. Toiyapovv — drroKpivelTai] 
 
 " Therefore when we call his 
 art phantastic, by this method 
 he will easily grapple with us 
 
 and disarm us, asking, when 
 we call him an image-maker, 
 what we mean by an image 
 generally. We must consider, 
 then, Thesetetus, what answer 
 can be given to this question 
 of our sinewy foe." 
 
 (pavTao-TiKrjv Tex vr l v ] The main 
 argument is here resumed from 
 p. 236 c. 
 
 12. eK TavTr/g ttjs ^pei'as] "A- 
 vailing himself of this line of 
 argument." Viz. : that just 
 indicated, by which appearance 
 is shewn to rest on Not-Being : 
 and Not-Being is proved to be 
 inconceivable. eK here ex- 
 presses the means. 
 
 13. dvTikapQavopevos — Xo'yovs] 
 
 " He will grapple with us and 
 retort our argument upon us, 
 as it were binding our hands 
 behind our backs." The implied 
 metaphor in dvTi\ap(3dvecrdai — 
 used frequently of an objector's 
 arguments — suggests the bolder 
 image taken from the common 
 expression dnoo-Tpe^ai tlvos tos 
 
 try to in- 
 dent '.III.; 
 
 rlll'lil i- r.\ - 
 
 If this be 
 impossible, 
 the Sophist 
 
 must be 
 allowed to 
 have hid 
 himself in 
 a very 
 " dark 
 tower." 
 
 For if ac- 
 cused of 
 " phantas- 
 tic" or of 
 image- 
 
 N 2, 
 
92 
 
 IIAATQNOS 
 
 making, 
 be will aalt 
 " What i. 
 .■in image?" 
 And if wc 
 answer " a 
 reflection, 
 mould, or 
 picture," 
 lie will 
 make as if 
 he were 
 blind, and 
 ask for a 
 definition 
 that does 
 not need 
 the help of 
 visible 
 examples. 
 
 arpexf/ei tov? Xoyovs, orav elScoXonoLoi' avTov kolXco- p. 239. 
 fitv, dvtpcoTtov t'l 7iOT€ to irapcarav etocoXov Xeyo/xeu. 
 CTKoirelu ow, w Qealryre, XP r h Ti TL $ TC P veavia. irpos 
 to Ipontopievov caroKpivfiTai. 
 5 GEAI. ArjXov otl (jyrjaopiev to. T€ Iv Toh vdaai 
 Kou KotTOTTTpoL? e'ldcoXa, en Kou Ta yeypa\xp.lva /cat TO. 
 T€TV7rco/iei'a kou raAAa, baa ttov toluvtu Igtiv 
 erepa ; 
 
 SE. <&avep6?, co Gecc/r^re, el ao(pio-Tr)i> ov)( eco- e 
 
 10 pOLKCO?. 
 
 GEAI. Tt 5tJ ; 
 
 iH'E. Aotjet aoi p.veii> 77 iravTcmacTiv ovk e\eiv 
 6fx/j.aTa. 
 
 GEAI. riw; 
 
 15 SE. Tr]V CLTTOKpiGlV OTCLV OVTC09 OLVTCp 8iOCpS, lav 
 
 ev KaT07TTpoi9 r) TrXaafiacTL Xeyrj? ti, KciTayeXacreTai 
 aov tcou Xoycov, otclv los (3Xe7rouTi Xeyrj? clvtco, 
 
 TTpQCFTTOlOVlieVOS 0VT6 KCCTOTTTpa OVT6 vScLTa yiyVLO- 
 
 xelpas. Cf. Legg. i , 6 2 6 e : naXiv 
 
 tov \6yov dvaa-Tfje\JAcoij,ev. I. e. 
 
 " Let us make the converse 
 statement." Theast. 191 c : 
 
 iravTa fierao~Tpe(povTa Xoyov j3a- 
 (Tavi{eiv. tovs Xoyovs is brought 
 in ivapa irpoo-doKiav at the end 
 of the sentence. Compare the 
 metaphorical use of o-vp.Trohi£eiv 
 and Trap air ohi^eiv. 
 
 I . orav el8a>\oTTOi6v\ For the 
 double sentence (el — orav), cf. 
 The?et. 199 b : orav — ore. So 
 also immediately below, where 
 orav is resumed by iav. 
 
 3. ra) veavia] Not necessarily 
 = homo protervus vel insolens 
 (Ast.). " This, fine fellow." 
 " The young man," in a playful 
 sense. Cf. Rep. 8, 549 b : Kal 
 
 earn jxev — tolovtos tis o TijioKpa- 
 tikos veavia':. Phsedr. 257 d : 
 TeXolov y, o) veavia, to doyp,a 
 Xeyeis. Eur. Ale. 698 : fj tov 
 koXov o~ov rrpovdavev veaviov. 
 
 12. Ao£ei 0-01 p.veiv] " He will 
 
 seem as one who has his eyes 
 shut." 8oKe1v is used here to 
 express an appearance volun- 
 tarily assumed. For p,ieiv, cf. 
 Theset. 163 e : fj Ka\ p.vo-as. 
 
 1 6. fj TrXdo-p.ao-t] Referring to 
 to. yeypafj.jj.eva Kal to. TeTVTra>jj.eva 
 supra. 
 
 For iav resuming orav, which 
 was doubted by Heindorf, cf. 
 Rep. 4, 445 a, b ; lb. 7, 529 b, 
 c — where there is similar va- 
 riation in resuming with iav. 
 
2CXM2TH2. 
 
 93 
 
 I 24O. (JKHV OVT€ TO TTapaiTaV O^TLV, TO 8' 6/C TO)V XoyoOV 
 
 ipoiTrjorei ere fiovov. 
 0EAI. Uohu; 
 
 HE. To 81a iravrwv tovtcov, a noXXa elirwv 
 rjijloocras ein irpoaeLireiv ovopaTi, (^ey^d/.teuos 1 el- 5 
 SooXov eVrt iracriv u>s ev ov. Xeye ovv kou ol/jlvvov, 
 IxrjSev vnoxcopcou, tov av8pa. 
 
 GEAI. T/ SrjTct, (6 ijeve, e'lScoAov av (pai/neu eivat 
 TrXrjV ye to irpos tolXtjOlvov d(j)cofxoicofx€i>oi> erepou 
 
 What is 
 that one 
 nature, lie 
 will ask, 
 in right 
 of which 
 these 
 
 various ob- 
 jects have 
 a common 
 name ? 
 Another 
 like thing 
 fashioned 
 
 I . to 8" ex rmv \6y<ov\ In 
 this, as in other respects, the 
 Sophistic method is the carica- 
 ture of that of Socrates. Cf. 
 Theset. 146, Meno 79. There 
 is a strong likeness between the 
 Sophist here described and the 
 TTiXrao-riKos avrjp pno-Qotyopos iv 
 Xo'yoty epofievos, with whom The- 
 setetus is threatened by So- 
 crates in Theset. 165 c-e : and 
 there is certainly an analogy 
 between the method now satir- 
 ized and the tyiXol Xdyot of 
 which Theodoras speaks in the 
 same dialogue (Theset. 165 a). 
 Contrast, however, with this 
 dialectical treatment of the 
 difficulties attending the con- 
 ception of Not-Being, the Eris- 
 tic use of the same question 
 by Euthydeinus (Euthycl. 283 
 e — 285 a) and the retort of 
 Socrates (ib. 286). The expres- 
 sion in the text perhaps in- 
 dicates a certain reaction from 
 the idea of basing knowledge 
 on purely abstract definitions. 
 Cf. supr. 234 e, and compare 
 the Euthydemus, especially 
 p. 290. For the use of 4k 
 ( = What may lie gathered 
 
 from argument), cf. Gorg. 516 
 
 d : ovk lip ayaObs ra ttoXitiko. 
 RepiicKrjS fjv i< tovtov tov Aoyou. 
 Ou (TV ye <fif]S. Ma At", ovde ye 
 o~v, e£ o>f lopdkoyeis. 
 
 t&v Xo'ycoj/] The word is 
 here used in the more restricted 
 sense of " abstract reasoning." 
 
 4. to $ia TravTOiV tovtcov] 
 
 " That which interpenetrates 
 all these." Cf. infr. 253 d : 
 
 fxlav I8eav 8ia ttoXXcov, evbs e/ca- 
 o-rou Keipevov ^copi's, vavTr] 8ia- 
 Terapevrjv. 
 
 5. <pdey£apevos ev 6V] The 
 
 common term is not dis- 
 tinguished from the common 
 nature. 
 
 7. tov avhpd] The accusa- 
 tive is probably governed, 
 vnepftaToos, by dfxivov, accord- 
 ing to the inverted style 
 of these dialogues. Heindorf, 
 
 who Connects viroxa>pa>v tov 
 
 civSpa, compares Phileb. 43 a : 
 
 vneKCTTrjvai tov \6yov eViCpepo'yue- 
 vov tovtov (3ov\opai. But the 
 parallel is impaired by the 
 participle enKpepopevov. 
 
 9. npos TaXrjdivov «<p.] " Fa- 
 shioned to the resemblance of 
 what is real." 
 
94 
 
 IIAATQNOS 
 
 after the 
 real ' 
 
 Not like in 
 being real i 
 
 A likeness 
 is not real, 
 and yet it 
 has a sort 
 of being. 
 
 3E. Erf pov Se Xeyeis tolovtov uXijOlvov, ?; eVi p. 240 
 
 TtVL TO TOLOVTOV CiVey \ b 
 
 0EAI. Ovda/JLco? dXrjOivov ye, dXX ioiKo? pev. 
 
 SE. ' Apa to dXrjdivbv ovtcos ov Xeycov ; 
 s GEAI. Ovtcos. 
 
 SE. T/ 8e ; to per) dXrjOivov dp evavTiov dXrj- 
 Oovs j 
 
 GEAI. Timv; 
 
 aE. Oitc * ovtcos* ov dpa Xeyeis to eoiKos, ehrep 
 toavTO ye /at) dXrjOivov epels. 
 
 GEAI. 'AAA' eaTL ye pr)v irtos. 
 
 1. "Erepov — d\t]6iv6v] "When 
 you say ' such another,' do you 
 mean another real thing ?" Cf. 
 Rep. I, 333 a : Evpfiokaia 8e Xe- 
 yeis KOiucovT]fJ.aTa, rj ri a'AXo ; 
 
 3. eoiKos pev] Subaud. akr]8i- 
 
 vbv 8' ov. Cf. Rep. 5, 475 d : 
 
 tovtovs ovv Tvavras cpihocrocpovs 
 (pr]0-op.ev • Ov8apcos, einov, aAX' 
 opolovs pev (pi\oo~6(pois. 
 
 6. to pr) — ap evavrlov] This 
 
 rests on the conception of Not- 
 Being as the opposite of Being, 
 which it is one chief object of 
 this dialogue to modify. Hence 
 probably the emphasis (apa, 
 ' surely ?') with which the ques- 
 tion is put and answei-ed (ri 
 firjv • ' of course'). The phrase 
 cIkow ovtcos occurs again in 
 Legg. 2, 668 d. 
 
 9. ovk *6Wo)s* ov] The cor- 
 rection of the Zurich editors, 
 which is both clearly intelli- 
 gible and accounts for the va- 
 riety of readings. Bekker, with 
 most MSS., gives ovk ov; Bodl. 
 
 AIT, OVK OVTCOV OVK OV : 3, OlIK 
 
 ovtcos ovk ov : Proclus, OVK OVTOS 
 
 ovk ov. The reading of E, 
 which Hermann has adopted, 
 
 is too abrupt an inference from 
 the preceding lines, and antici- 
 pates the point which is made 
 afterwards, ovto is unemphatic, 
 and ye is to be taken closely 
 with e'Lnep as modifying the 
 whole clause. " You mean 
 then by an image what is not 
 really existent, if, at least, you 
 will speak of it as unreal." 
 Another way of correcting the 
 passage is to read ovtcov ovk ov : 
 "An image is of realities, but 
 itself unreal." ovto would then 
 be emphatic. But the former 
 mode is simpler, and therefore 
 better. 
 
 1 1. 9E. 'AXX' eori ye prjv ttcos] 
 This arrangement of the speak- 
 ers is due to C. F. Hermann. 
 The other editions and MSS. 
 
 give dXX' e'aTi. ye p-qv to the 
 
 Stranger. To which Thesetetus 
 answers ttcos ; but receives no 
 direct reply. This awkward- 
 ness is avoided by Hermann's 
 arrangement ; and Thesetetus 
 is led to admit in so many 
 
 words OTi fj eiKcov eariv ovk ov. 
 
 Thus a point is covertly made 
 toward.? the main argument. 
 
20*I2TH2. 
 
 95 
 
 o. SE. Ovkovv dXijOco? ye, 0r/s-. 
 
 GEAI. Ov yap ovv rrXijv y eiKiov ovtoo?. 
 SE. Ovk ov dpa ovk ovtcos iariv oVrcoy rjv 
 Xeyo/xev eiKova ; 
 
 C GEAI. KlvSvV€V€L TOLaVTfjV TLVa 7T€7rX€)(0ai CTVpL- 
 
 wXoKrjv to pa) ov rw ovtl, koll paXa octottov. 
 
 SE. rtcoy yap ovk oltottov ; opas yovv on Ka\ 
 vvv 8ia rrjs €7raXXdiJ€cos ravri]? 6 7ro\vKe(j)a\os 
 ao(j)io~Tr]9 rjvayK.aK.ev rjpas to per/ ov ov% (.KOVTas 
 bpioXoyeiv eivai 7rco?. 
 
 GEAI. 'Opa> koll paXa. 
 
 HE. T7 <5e 8r) ; ttjv Te^vr/v avTOv Tiva d(popi- 
 aavTes r)puv amois avpt(f)covelv oiol re eaop.e6a ; 
 
 GEAI. Ilfj Kal TO TToloV TL (f)o(3ovp€V09 OVTO) 
 
 Xeyeis ; 
 
 1 1 i- i. all} 
 
 an unreal 
 
 it v, though 
 nut really 
 anything. 
 
 Thus tlie 
 Sophist 
 
 has forced 
 us to ad- 
 mit that 
 that which 
 is not, is. 
 
 How then 
 
 shall we 
 15 consis- 
 
 For nas, cf. infr. : opoXoyelv eivai 
 nms, rj ttcos eivai ra fj.rj8ajj.rj ovra, 
 eivai irons ra iir) ovra. 
 
 i. Ovkow'] Stallbaum reads 
 ovkovv, with nine MSS., for the 
 vulg. ovk ov. But the answer 
 of Theretetus seems to require 
 the negative ovkovv. 
 
 ye, (prjs] Bodl. All, y e<jjriv : 
 probably from ye pr)v suprL 
 
 3. ovk ov — owTffls] Ovk ov be- 
 cause ovk aXrjdivov, ovk ovtcos 
 because ovk dXrjdcos, ovras be- 
 cause ehcbv ovtcos. " What we 
 call an image is really, witbout 
 having reality, an unreal thing." 
 
 5. ToiavT-qv riva — o-vfj,n'hoKr)v~\ 
 
 Cf. Legg. 9, 863 b : to rr)s d8i- 
 
 Kias re Kal /3Xa/3jjs 8id(popov Kal 
 to twv eKovaiiov re Kal aKovaicov 
 a>S ev tovtois 8ia7re7roiKi/\rai. 
 
 Y. opas yovv on] The Bodl. 
 MS. gives these words only in 
 the margin, where Gaisford 
 
 read opas ovv, but the y, though 
 nearly lost, may be traced, 
 where the words were blotted 
 while the ink was still wet, on 
 the opposite leaf. The Stranger 
 recals Thesetetus from merely 
 wondering at the result to ob- 
 serve the point of the diffi- 
 culty. 
 
 8. 8ia Trjs eTraWd^ecos rai/Trjs] 
 
 " Through this reciprocation of 
 opposites." 
 
 TToXvKecpaXov] I. e. " whom 
 we have already slain in so 
 many shapes." There is of 
 course an allusion to the hydra. 
 Cf. Euthyd. 297 c : rg — v8pa, 
 
 aocpiarpia oiiarj, Kal 8id tj)v cro- 
 (piav avie'iarj, el piav Ke(paXr)v tov 
 \6yov tis anorepoi, noWas dvrl 
 rrjs pids. 
 
 9. r)vayKaKev] So Bodl., with 
 
 the nine MSS. mentioned by 
 
 Bekker. ^ulg. r)vdyKa<rev. 
 
tently de 
 scribe bis 
 
 Shall we 
 say that 
 In- i-ri:iti-s 
 a false im- 
 pression ; 
 that a 
 false im- 
 pression 
 attributes 
 being to 
 non-exist- 
 ence, and 
 vice vei'sa; 
 
 96 IIAATQNOS 
 
 HE. "Orai/ 7T€pi to (])dvTa<r/ia avrov drraTav p. 240. 
 
 and that a 
 false propo- 
 sition does 
 the same ? 
 
 ([ito/iev Kca ti-jv re\vr]v elva't rtva unvariqriKr]v avrov, ( 
 rore irorepov \j/ev8r] 8o^aQEtv rrjv y^/v^v r/ficov (j)rj- 
 crofiev vno rrjs eicelvov reyy-qs, i] tl ttot Ipovfiev ; 
 5 0EAI. Tovto' tl yap av akXo e'tTcatfiev ; 
 
 HE. tyevSrj? 8' av 8o£ja earat rdvavrla tow overt 
 So^dcpvaa, rj ttws ; 
 
 0EAI. Tdvavrla. 
 
 HE. Ae'yets apa to, fir] ovra 8o^d^etv tyjv \jrev8rj 
 io8ofjai> ; 
 
 0EAI. 'AvdyKrj. 
 
 HE. Ylorepov fir) elvat rd fir) ovra 8o^d^ovaav, rj 
 was eivai rd firfiajicos ovra ; 
 
 0EAI. "Rival 7TC09 rd fir) ovra 8el ye, elirep \j/ev- 
 1 5 erera'i wore, ris tl Ka\ Kara (3pa)(y. 
 
 HE. Tl 8'; ov K.a\ fi7]8afJLCos elvaL rd rcavTois 
 ovra 8o^d^eraL ; 
 
 0EAI. No/. 
 
 HE. Kat tovto 8rj \jsev8o9 ; 
 ™ 0EAI. Kai tovto. 
 
 HE. Kai \6yos, olfiat, \lsev8r)s ovrco Kara ravrd 
 [ra,VTa\ vofiio~di]creTat rd re ovra Xeyu>v fir] elvat ko.\ 
 rd fir] ovra elvat. 
 
 0EAI. Has yap av aAAeos tolovtos yevotro ; 
 
 6. ravavria to'is ovai] These- 
 tetus is again made to assert 
 the view of Not-Being as the 
 opposite of Being, which is pre- 
 sently modified. See below, 258 
 
 e : Mrj Toivvv fj/jias etirrj tis on TOU- 
 
 fdl'TlOl' TOV OVTOS TO /JLT) OV UTTO(f)al- 
 
 vofxevoi To\fxoofj.iv \eyeiv w? 'io-riv. 
 14. Set ye] Sc. Aeyeii/ avrrjv 
 8o£d(eiv. 
 
 19, 20, 21. Kai — Kai — KaY] = 
 
 " Also." 
 
 21. Kara ravra [tovto] ] Tavra 
 
 is omitted in nine MSS. 
 
 24. SKkcos] Most of the MSS. 
 give aWos ; which if received 
 would require 6 rd re ovra 
 \eyav. The reading of the 
 editions is preferable, as in- 
 volving a slighter change. 
 
2o<MrrH2. 
 
 !)7 
 
 .1, aE. ^2)(eSov ovSafioos' dXXa ravra 6 (rocjjaJTi)? 
 ov (f)rjcr€L. r) tl? firjyavrj avyxfopuv rivd rcov ev 
 (f)povovvTO)v, orav a<pOeyKTa kcu dpprjra kull dXoya 
 koll ddtavoyra rrpoS loo fioXoyr)/ Leva ?) ra ivpo tovtcov 
 6/j.oXoyijOe'vTa ; fiavOdvoLiev, co QeaiTyre, a *Acyet* ; 5 
 
 0EAI. IT&>s" yap ov pLavOavoLiev, otl rdvavria 
 (Prjo-et. Xeyeiv rj/xas T0I9 vvv 8rj, \j/evSr} ToXLirjaavTa? 
 elirelv d>s eariv ev bo^ais re koI Kara Xoyov? ; rw 
 yap lit) ovti to ov TrpoaaTrreLv r]fxas iroXXaxis dvay- 
 
 h KatJEadai, SLOLioXoyrjo-a/ie'vov? vvv 8rj irov tovto elvai ic 
 TravToov dSwaTGOTarov. 
 
 HE. 'OpOce? d7T€Livr)p.6vevaas, dXX' wpa drj (3ov- 
 XeveaOai t'l \pi) 8pav rod o-o(J)icttov irepi" ra? ydp 
 dvTiXrjxf/eL? Kal d7ropla?, eav avrbv diepevvcofiev ev rfj 
 
 II.: will 
 
 turn upon 
 11 1 and a I. 
 
 what has 
 
 1 
 
 to nth i- 
 
 the wi r>l 
 •Not- 
 Being.' 
 
 2. fj Tis firixavri'] He adopts 
 the tone of the Sophist. 
 
 4. 7rpo$ia>p.oXoyripevci\ " When 
 
 it has been previously granted 
 (supr. 238 d) that the very 
 terms of the admissions which 
 have just been made are un- 
 utterable," &c. Cf. Tim. 78 a: 
 
 Trpobioixukoyrjvcmevoi. Bodl. All, 
 Tvpoa8cop.oXnyr)p.eva : whence C 
 
 F. Hermann gives npos dicapo- 
 \oyqp,iva. But this reading is 
 without point. 
 
 ra irpb tovtcov 6poXoyr]6e'v- 
 
 ra] Heindorf observes that 
 Plato uses this periphrasis to 
 avoid the repetition of pfj ov. 
 The words refer to the discus- 
 sion (of the nature of a likeness) 
 which precedes the mention of 
 doga and Xoyos, and which bris- 
 tles with the forbidden expres- 
 sions. P. 2 40 b. Compare Phil eb. 
 
 50 C : ra vvv ttoKKclkis Xeyopeva. 
 
 5. a *Xe'yei*] Bekker, judg- 
 ing from Gaisford's silence, re- 
 
 ports \eyei as the Bodleian 
 reading. Unfortunately, this 
 MS. agrees with all the rest 
 except Par. P. in giving Xeyeis. 
 But the context leaves no room 
 for doubting that Xeyei is right. 
 The Stranger has been speak- 
 ing in the Sophist's person. 
 See (prjarei in the next line, and 
 compare the defence of Pro- 
 tagoras in Theast. 166. For 
 pav6dvopev in the 1st pers. plur., 
 cf. supr. 223 e, and note, also 
 
 Phileb. 51 d: dA\' dpa pavBd- 
 vo/j.ev, r] ttcos ] IIP. Tveipoipaa. pev, 
 6) Scoxpares. 
 
 8. Kara \6yovs] This use of 
 Kara confirms the correction Kara 
 biKao-rr)pia in Thefefc. 201 d. 
 
 13. tL xpn SpH Cf. Legg. 
 
 6j 777 c • 8iaTTopT](Tfie tl \pi] 
 Spav we pi anavTcov to>v toiovtcov. 
 
 14. dvTiXfyeis] "Handles for 
 objection." Lit. " Occasions 
 for laying hold," as in wrest- 
 ling. Cf. supr. 239 d. 
 
98 
 
 IIAATQNQ2 
 
 And this 
 is only the 
 beginning 
 
 of diffi- 
 culties. 
 
 Must 
 we, then, 
 give up in 
 despair ? 
 
 tcov \j/evSuvpyu>v kou yoi'-jTUiV reyyr\ TtQevTes. bpos cos' 
 eviropoi kou iroXXal. 
 
 0EAI. Rat ptdXa. 
 
 HE. yiunpov fxepo? toivvv avrcov SieXi]Xv0ap.ev, 
 5 ovcrcov coy ejro? eiireiv tmepavrow. 
 
 0EAI. ABvvarov yap [av], a>? eotKev, [en;] rov 
 crofpurTrjv eXeiv, el ravra ovtcds e\ei. 
 
 3?E. TV ovv ; a.7roaTrja6pe0a vvv pLaXOaKiadevre^ ; 
 
 GEAI. Ovkovv eycoye (f)T]pLi Sell/, el /cat /cara 
 loapuKpov olol t eirLXafieaOai ny rdvSpo? eapev. 
 
 HE. r/ E^et? olw avyyvco/xyv /cat KaOdirep vvv etVe? 
 dyairrjcreLS, edv t?t\ kou Kara. (ipa^y irapaaTraawpeOa 
 ovrois uryypov Xoyov ; 
 
 p. 241. 
 
 6. 'aSiWtov yap] The Bod- 
 leian has Tap (sic), which sug- 
 gests the possibility of a read- 
 ing rap' ( = rot cipa). But yap is 
 probably right. Cf. Thetet. 
 190 e : ovre yap ravrrj ovre Kara. 
 Ta itpdrepa (paiverai -^rev^ris iv 
 Tjpuv ovcra bo^a. Gorg. 454 d: 
 LrjXov yap av ort ov rairov 
 
 ia-Tiv. And iEsch. Ag. 218 : 
 
 Havaavepiov yap dvcrlas irap6eviov 
 0' alparos opyfj itepiopyas eitiBv- 
 
 p.fiv dep,is. Eur. Med. 573. 
 
 [av] — [e'irf] ] The former word 
 is found in TACH, and 
 by a later hand in 2B, the 
 latter in every MS. except S. 
 Possibly 'Aftvvarov yap (or rap'), 
 a>s eoiK, av eirj may be the true 
 reading. 
 
 11. Kadditep vvv elite?] viz. in 
 saying el Ka\ Kara. crpiKpov k. t, A. 
 
 12. edv 7777 Ka\] Ka\ is pro- 
 bably to be taken intensively 
 with Kara j3paxv ; cf. supr. 
 240 e : elite p ■fyevo-eTal itore rls 
 ti Kiii Kara ftpaxv. " If we 
 
 should flinch a little from the 
 grasp of such a sturdy ar- 
 gument." The metaphor from 
 wrestling is continued through- 
 out. Cf. Phileb. 41 b: itpoiri- 
 (TTuipeda S?) Kadditep d8\r]Ta\ itpos 
 tovtov av t6v Xoyov. 
 
 itapao-itaacop.e6a] Lit. " pull 
 
 ourselves aside, draw aside ;" 
 i. e. release ourselves from the 
 contest. Cf. Soph. El. 732 : 
 e£a> itapacrna (sc. tovs iititovs) 
 KavaKwxevei. The middle voice 
 is here directly reflexive, not 
 as in Dem. Olynth. 1, 10 : p.r] 
 itapao-itdo-rjTai ti tcov oXcov itpay- 
 
 pdrcov. Compare the use of 
 ditoo-rtdo-6ai in Xen. Anab. 1, 5. 
 
 § 2 : itoXv yap diteaitdro (pevyovaa. 
 
 Those, however, who prefer 
 the latter meaning here (read- 
 ing edv ttr] ti, with Badh. conj.), 
 may compare Theset. 196 d : 
 
 ti el eitixeiprjo'aip.ev avaio~xyvTelv ; 
 
 For the personification, cf. ib. 
 148c: el — roil aKp.d£ovros Ka\ 
 raxio-rov r)TTr)8r)s, 
 
20<I>I2TH2. 
 
 99 
 
 ). 241. GEAI. II coy yap 06% c'ijco \ 
 
 d 3*E. To8e to'lvvv en p,aXXov irapaiTovpai ae. 
 GEAI. To ttolou ; 
 
 aE. Mt; yue chcw irarpaKoiav vnoXafir)? ylyvtaOai 
 Tiva. 
 
 GEAI. T/A75 
 
 EE. Toy roO iroLTpos Ylappevldov Xoyov avayKalov 
 rjp.lv <xpvvop.evois ear at fiacravL^eiv, kqll (3id{ecr0ai to 
 re pr) bv coy eo-n Kara ri Kal to bv av naXiv coy ovk 
 
 eaTL TTYj. 
 
 GEAI. ( T*aiv€Tai to tolovtov 8t.apa)(r)Teov iv to 19 
 Xoyois. 
 
 jS*E. II coy yap ov (fiaiveTai Kal, to Xeyop.evov Srj 
 tovto, Tv(pXcp ; tovtcov yap p.r)Te tXeyyOevTw prjTe 
 
 Not if we 
 may be 
 
 allowed, 
 in Belf- 
 
 defence, to 
 bring the 
 
 ruvcn-il 
 words of 
 
 5 Parme- 
 nides to 
 the test, 
 and to force 
 the con- 
 clusion, 
 that there 
 is a sense 
 in which 
 Not-Being 
 
 10 is, and 
 Being is 
 not. 
 
 8. $ia£ecrdai — is] " To prove 
 by main force that — ." The idea 
 is not that of necessaiy demon- 
 stration, but that of establishing 
 something against appearances. 
 
 Cf. infr. 246 b : vorjrci arret Kal 
 d(rd)fj.ara et'Sr; f5ia£6jxevoi rr)v dXrj- 
 6ivr)v ovcriav elvai. Theset. 1 53 
 c : avaymfa — Ins. Symp. 202 a : 
 pr) ro'ivvv avajKa^e, 6 pi) koXov 
 ear iv ala-xpov elvai. Cf. Legg. 8, 
 841 d, Avhere Ptdfrfiat is used of 
 effecting something paradoxical 
 and difficult in practice. 
 
 II. Waiver at Xdyois] The 
 
 Bodl. MS., with A and pr. 
 
 II., 0111. 8iafj.axrjreoi>, which 
 
 C. F. Hermann accordingly 
 rejects, with the remaining 
 words, retaining only cpaiverat. 
 " Languidum additamentum 
 totum circumscripsi." But it 
 may be retoi-ted that, especi- 
 ally considering the formal 
 style of the dialogue, (paiverai 
 alone in this place is abrupt 
 
 O 
 
 LofC. 
 
 and bare. Cf. also Siupaxdpevoi, 
 infr. 256 d. 
 
 13. ku\] To be taken with 
 rv(f)Xcp : the words to \ey6uevov 
 br) rouro being thrust in between. 
 
 Cf. SUpr. 2l8 a, Kal, Kaddnep 
 eiire SaiKpdrrjs, Tvdcri k. e. and 
 
 note. See also Rep. 5, 465 d : 
 
 ArjXov, e(prj, Kal rv(j)\a. 
 
 14. eXeyx6evTa>v] The Bodl., 
 with AnBi, has pijre \ex6evrap, 
 which is Weak ; eXeyxdevrtov is 
 
 right. " Unless this refutation 
 and this admission is secured." 
 I. e. unless the saying of 
 Parmenides is refuted and 
 the existence of the non-ex- 
 istent admitted. Cf. infr. 
 
 242 b : rov eXeyvov rovrov Kal 
 
 rr)v d7r68eigiv. In Theaet. 188 d 
 sqq., it is shewn to be 
 impossible to think what is 
 not, because all thought must 
 have a real object. As Mr. 
 Grote remarks, this and other 
 negative arguments of the 
 
100 
 
 nAATGNOS 
 
 I Ulicrwi ie 
 an art i f 
 
 and, in- 
 deed, all 
 imitation, 
 is Lncon- 
 ceh able. 
 
 p. 241, 
 e 
 
 o/JLoXoyijOevrcov cr^oXfj irore ns 616s re ear at irep\ 
 Xoycov \J/ev8a>v Xeycov ?) 86{jr)v, elre el8a>Xa)v elre 
 cikovcov elre fjaptr] /iareov elre (Ijavraaparcov, avrcov, rj 
 kgu ire pi reyvcov rcov oaai 7repi ravra eicri, fxr] Kara- 
 tyeXaaros elvat ra. evavrla avayKatpfievos avrco 
 Xe'yeiv. 
 
 9EAI. 'AXirfe'arara. 
 
 SE. Aia ravra fxevrot roXprjreov ewirldeadai rap. 242 
 irarpiKw Xoyco vvv, r\ to rrapairav iareov, el rovro n? 
 lotipyet 8pav okvos. 
 
 0EAI. 'AAA' rjiias rovro ye prj8ev prjSapfj e'lp^r). 
 
 £?E. Tplrov ro'ivvv en ere a/xiKpov ri TTapairr\- 
 ao/JLai. 
 
 0EAI. Aeye fiovov. 
 15 HE. Wirrov 7rov vvv Srj Xeycov w? rrpos rov irep\ 
 ravr e'Xeyxpv ael re a7reipr)Kco? iyco rvy^ava) Kal 8r) 
 Kal ra vvv. 
 
 0EAI. EtTrey. 
 
 Thesetetus are not directly re- 
 futed in the Sophistes. It is 
 rather the negative mode of 
 arguing generally which is cri- 
 ticized. 
 
 3. avrav, r) Kal ire pi Te)(vcov] 
 
 " themselves, or the arts which 
 relate to these." avribv refers 
 to all the preceding genitives. 
 Cf. Rep. 3, 398 a : ei rjplv depi- 
 koito els rr)v ivokiv avros re Kal 
 ra Tioirjpara (3ov\6pevos eViSei- 
 
 ijacrdai.. The other rendering, 
 according to which avrmv refers 
 to (pavTaa-fidrcov alone as the very 
 subject-matter of the Sophist's 
 art, is not so good. 
 
 8. Ata ravra pevroi] " Ob- 
 vious as this truth is, it com- 
 pels us — " 
 
 ra> TrarpiKU) \6y(o\ \6yos is 
 
 personified, as in rod pao-i'KiKov 
 \6yov supr. 235 C, and narptKos 
 has the same force as in narpt- 
 kos (f)iXos — " The theory which 
 is invested with the sacred- 
 ness of our father's autho- 
 rity." 
 
 9 . to rrapdivav iareov ] to 
 
 Trapdirav is probably adver- 
 bial, and the object of iareov 
 must be supplied, e. g. rov 
 \6yov — " We must give up en- 
 tirely." 
 
 1 1 . rovro -ye] Sc. &crre to 
 napdnav iav. Cf. Polit. 268 d : 
 rovro ro'ivvv — rjp.lv Troir)reov, el pr) 
 peXXopev inl ra reXei Karaio-)(£>vai 
 rov \6yov. N. 2. 'AXAa pr)v 
 ovdapcos rovro ye bpao-reov. 
 
2CXM2TH2. 
 
 101 
 
 ). 242. aE. <&ofiovpai Si) to, elpr/peva, pi) ttotc Sia Tama 
 aot paviKOs eivai Sotjco irapa iroSa peTaftaXcov e'pav- 
 1) tov avoa kcu Karen. o~i)v yap Si) X a P lv £^YX eiu T0V 
 \oyov 67ri8r)(Top€0a, lavirep eXeyxcopev. 
 
 0EAI. '0? tolvvv epoiye pr/Sapf) So^cov prjSlvS 
 7rXr)ppeXeii>, av eirt tov eAeyxov tovtov ko.1 tt)v cmo- 
 Sei^LV lr)9, flappwv Wi tovtov ye eW/ca. 
 
 £7E. <J>€/0€ Si) ; Tiva apyj)v ti? av ap^aiTO irapa- 
 KLvSvvevTLKOv Xoyov ; Sokcd pev yap ti)vS\ 00 7rai, 
 tt)V bSov avayKatoranqv i)plv dvai TpeirecrOai. IC 
 
 0EAI. Uolav Si) ; 
 
 SE. Ta SoKovvTa vvv evapyco? tX eiv €7rta-/ce^a- 
 c aflat irpwTOV, pi) irr) Terapaypevoi pev copev 7repl 
 
 With this 
 view it 
 will be 
 necessary 
 to exam i ue 
 some idi a 
 which are 
 thought to 
 be clear, 
 but may 
 prove to be 
 confused. 
 
 1. $o/3ovpai] "I tremble, 
 then, to think of what I have 
 said, lest you should pronounce 
 me wild." For dei re S17 inter- 
 posed, cf. Rep. 2, 367 e: Kcu 
 
 e'yco dKovcras, del pev drj rrjv (ftvcriv 
 tov TXavKcovos ko.1 tov \beipdvTov 
 rjydprjv, arap ovv kcu Tore ndvv 
 
 ye rjadrjv : and for the meaning, 
 compare supr. 242b: ml yap 
 
 nakai Kai rd vvv rjTTTjpevov civ 
 
 evpot. Theset. 187 c. 
 
 2. irapa 7rd8a] "At the first 
 
 step ;" " at each step ;" "at every 
 other step." The expression is 
 used of persons in motion, as 
 nap ttoSI, in Pindar, of persons 
 at rest. Thus Soph. Phil. 838 : 
 
 ttoXv napa noda Kpdros dpvvrai. 
 
 In the present passage wapa 
 seems to have the additional 
 meaning of alternation, as in 
 
 Trap' rjpepav. 
 
 pera^aXav] The tense cor- 
 responds to that of dogco, 
 otherwise peTa/SdWccv would 
 have seemed more natural, 
 
 especially with uvea ku\ Kara. 
 Cf. Phsed. 96 b: iroWdicis epav- 
 tov civco Kara peTeftaWov. But 
 
 in the present case only one 
 change " to and fro " is spoken 
 of. 
 
 3. arjv ydp 817 x<*P LV ] Com- 
 pare the language of Socrates 
 in the fifth book of the Re- 
 public, before advancing his 
 theory of communism, 450 e. 
 See also ib. 473 c. Such ex- 
 pressions of reluctance perhaps 
 receive some light from the 
 passages in the Epistles, if 
 genuine, where it is said that 
 the philosopher will not choose 
 to fix his thought in writing. 
 
 I O. avayKaiordrrjv — Tpe7Tecr6ai\ 
 
 For the inf. after dvay<a'ios, cf. 
 
 Gorg. 449 b. dvayKaioTaTrjv — 
 paXicrra dvayicaiov. Cf. Phileb. 
 63 b : oTpat pev irpbs ravra rod' 
 avrds dvayKaiorarov eivai \eyeiv. 
 13. pi] Try Terapaypevoi] "Lest 
 
 we should have fallen into some 
 confusion in regard to these 
 
 
102 
 
 IIAATQX02 
 
 A. 
 Parme- 
 nides and 
 
 ravra, paSioi? <5' dAAi']Aoi$ ifxoXoywfxev cos* evKpivcos p. 242, 
 
 0EAI. Aeye aacjiearepov o Aeyets. 
 
 HE. JLvkoAco? fxoi 8oKel Ylapfievidrjs rj/xiv SietXe^- 
 
 things, while glibly interchang- 
 ing arguments, as if we were 
 quite clear on the subject." 
 
 4. EixoXas] "Complacently;" 
 " with easy confidence ;" " with 
 good-humoured composure ;" 
 " in an easy-tempered way." Cf. 
 Theaet. 166 a : 2) padvp-OTare 
 
 EvkoXcos 8tei\e'x6ai] Plato 
 
 means what Aristotle expresses 
 where he says that Dialectic 
 had no place in early philo- 
 sophy, ol yap nporepoi 8iaXeKTi- 
 Krjs ov p-ereixov. Al\ Met. A. 
 
 6. 987 b. Compare the lan- 
 guage of an article in Fraser's 
 Magazine for February 1865 : 
 " In older theology there seems 
 (of course with brilliant ex- 
 ceptions) to have prevailed this 
 general defect — that endless 
 controversies, and defences, 
 and attacks, have gone round 
 and round these sacred terms 
 without even asking what they 
 mean." The question of Not- 
 Being is relative to that of 
 Being : hence, in order to 
 solve the difficulties which 
 have arisen, it is necessary to 
 examine this, the most familiar 
 and fundamental of all ideas. 
 This is done historically, 
 through a criticism of the re- 
 sults of previous and contem- 
 porary thought, involving the 
 unwelcome task of putting the 
 words of Parmenides to the 
 torture. The conjecture of 
 Badham, oi\ oXas = oXccs ov, 
 for cvKokas, is not convincing. 
 
 Cf. Legg. 11, 922 e : MaXdaKol 
 
 f/xoiy*, S> KXcivla, 8okov(Tiv ol 
 ndXai vopoderovvres yeyovtvai ku\ 
 em crpiKpbv rmv av6pumiva>v @Xe- 
 7rovres re xai Stavoovp.evot vop,o- 
 Serelv. 
 
 " I think that Parmenides, 
 and all who have hitherto 
 arisen to determine the ulti- 
 mate number and nature of 
 existences, have shewn in then- 
 conversation with us a sort of 
 easy, good-humoured compo- 
 sure." 
 
 " In what way ?" 
 
 " They seem to me to treat 
 us like children, and to tell us 
 stories, each one for himself; 
 one relating that there are 
 Beings three, which sometimes 
 maintain a desultory warfare, 
 but sometimes they make peace 
 again, and marry, and bring 
 forth children and rear them ; 
 another speaks of Two, as Moist 
 and Dry, or Hot and Cold, 
 which he brings together and 
 consorts in marriage. But the 
 tribe of the Eleatics from our 
 quarter, beginning with Xeno- 
 phanes, or even earlier, are the 
 authors of a different tale, and 
 fable that what we call ' all 
 things' are One Being. Then 
 certain Muses of Ionia, and 
 others of later birth in Sicily, 
 in taking up the parable have 
 seen that it is safer to combine 
 both histories and to say that 
 Being is Many and also One, 
 held together by hate and love. 
 For, say the Muses of firmer 
 
2Q*I2TH2. 
 
 103 
 
 p. 242. 6ai kcu iras oari? Trwirore hri npicrw wp/njae tov to. 
 bvra dioplaaaOai iroaa re kcu iroia lemv. 
 
 0EAI. Urj; 
 
 SE. Mv06i> Tuva (lkol<jtos (j)aiveTaL poi Sajyeladcu 
 irauriv coy ovcnv yplv, 6 plv coy rpla ra ovtcl, iroXtpels 
 
 tone, Being is ever sundered, 
 ever combined : while those, 
 who prefer a softer melody, 
 relax the ' ever,' and say that 
 All is sometimes one and 
 friendly by Aphrodite's power, 
 but sometimes many and at 
 enmity with itself by reason 
 of a certain principle of strife." 
 
 1. (ir\ Kpi(TLV TOV 8lOp'lO~a- 
 
 adai] Either " went forth to 
 decide the question of deter- 
 mining" — where the pleonasm, 
 though somewhat harsh, is not 
 inconsistent with the style of 
 these dialogues. For Kpiaiv in 
 this sense, cf. Euthyphr. 7 d : 
 
 eVi Tiva Kpiaiv ov bvvdpevoi d(pi- 
 KeaOai — eVl 'iKavrjv Kpiaiv aircov 
 iXdeiv. Or, " entered the arena 
 to contend for the honour of 
 determining." Cf. Legg. 1 2, 
 
 943 d : ftff TT]V tS)v dpiareitov 
 
 Kpiaiv. Soph. Trach. 266: irpbs 
 to£ov Kpiaiv. Philoct. 1050: 
 ottov biKaicov Kayadcov dvbpcov 
 
 Kplcris. According to the latter 
 rendering, Parmenides and the 
 rest are supposed to bring 
 their theories for judgment be- 
 fore the reason of mankind. 
 
 2. iroaa re kcu 7ro7a] Some 
 interpreters suppose that Ttoaa 
 refers to the earlier and nolo. 
 only to the later theories, (infr. 
 245 e, sqq.) But although the 
 former asked " Is Being One or 
 how many," and the latter, " Is 
 Being corporeal or ideal," this 
 distinction is probably not in- 
 
 tended by these words. And the 
 question of 7toi6tt]s is already 
 involved in theories of hot and 
 cold, moist and dry, harmony 
 or discord, and the like. 
 
 4. Mvdov riva — birjydadaij 
 
 Compare Bacon, Nov. Org. I. 
 Ax. 44 : " Quot philosophise 
 receptre aut inventas sunt, tot 
 fabulas productas et actas cen- 
 semus, quse muudos efficerent 
 fictitios et scenicos." lb. Ax. 
 62: "Atque hujusmodi thealri 
 fabulae habent etiam illud quod 
 in theatro poetarum usu venit ; 
 ut narrationes fictse ad scenam 
 narrationibus ex historia veris 
 concinniores sint et elegan- 
 tiores, et quales quis magis 
 vellet." Ar. Met. I. 10, 993 a: 
 
 ■yj/e'k'Xi^opevr] yap i'oiKev 17 npcoTT] 
 (piXoaofpia nepl iravrcov. 
 
 5. naialv a? ovaiv] The 
 
 position of naialv is emphatic. 
 
 Cf. Legg. I, 645 b: irep\ 6avpd- 
 
 tcov wj outwv T)p5>v. Rep. 8, 545 
 
 e : cos irpbs ivaibas fjpds. Illfr. 
 254 e : ov TVfpX rpicov cos OVTCOV 
 
 UVTCOV. 
 
 6 pev cos tp'ia — eKbibcoaiv] 
 The few remaining fragments 
 of the earliest philosophy do 
 not enable us to say what 
 thinkers are thus briefly indi- 
 cated : probably some belong- 
 ing to the earlier Ionic school. 
 The metaphorical language 
 seems to point to a pe- 
 riod when philosophy still re- 
 tained a considerable tinge of 
 
 others who 
 have 
 
 1 oughl i" 
 define the 
 Dumber 
 and nature 
 of exist- 
 ence, have 
 Dot been 
 careful t" 
 
104 
 
 IIAATQNOS 
 
 explain 
 
 their 
 
 meaning, 
 
 but after 
 throwing 
 
 out that 
 Being is 
 three or 
 two or one, 
 or one and 
 many, hot 
 and cold, 
 at peace 
 or war, or 
 that it is 
 first united 
 
 8e dWijkoi? ivioTt olvtlov olttol 7rrj, Tore 8e koll (j)ika p. 242. 
 yiyvoptva ydpovs re kou tokov? koll Tpo(f)d? tcov d 
 dKyovoiV 7rape)(€Tai' 8uo 8e (repos elvrcou, vypov koll 
 ^~lpov ?) Oepphv koll ^/vxpof, cfvvoikl^l re avrd koll 
 $6k818co(TI. to 8e Trap rjp.(ov 'EAeari/co^ eOvo?, oltto 
 
 A€VO(J)UVOV? T€ KOLL €TL TTpOtjQt-V dpj-dfltVOV, £09 
 
 evos ovtos tusv irdvTcov KaXovpevoiv ovrco 8i€^ep)(€Tai 
 T0I9 fJivOoi?. 'IaSe? 8e kou 2i«:eAa/ rives varepov 
 
 cosmogonical mythology. Thus 
 Pherecydes might be said to 
 have asserted three principles, 
 Zeus, Time, and Earth, as the 
 basis of his cosmogony. The 
 dualists here mentioned have 
 been supposed to include Arche- 
 laus, who, according to Diog. 
 Laert. II. 1 6, 17, ekeye bvo 
 alrlas elvai yevicreas, deppov kcu 
 
 tyvxpov, and who, in describing 
 the production of the animals, 
 says that they sprang from 
 the increasing warmth in the 
 lower parts of the Earth, oVou 
 to Geppoy kol to vj/uxpof epio-yeTO. 
 But, as Steinhart observes, (So- 
 phist, note 22,) the dualism of 
 heat and cold is a theory of the 
 Universe probably older than 
 Parmenides, who speaks of this 
 as the philosophy of opinion. 
 There is of course no allusion 
 to Parmenides in these words. 
 He is included in the 'EXeaTiKov 
 Wvos mentioned immediately 
 afterwards. 
 
 2. ydpovs — 7rape^erat] " Are 
 found to marry," &c. 
 
 5. to fie 7rap' fjfiap] I. e. e£ 
 'Ekeas. Heindorf and Stall- 
 baum prefer rjplv, which appears 
 in C. H. 2, a. b. c, and in the 
 quotations of Eusebius and 
 Theodoret. But fjpwv is pre- 
 
 ferable both as the reading of 
 the best MSS. and as the less 
 obvious reading: "The school 
 that came forth from us." 
 
 dno Sevofpdvovs Te Kal en 
 npoo-dev ap^dpevov] "From Xe- 
 nophanes downwards, and even 
 before Xenophanes." This is 
 conceived in the same spirit as 
 the attempt in the Thetetetus 
 to refer the Heraclitean dogma 
 to an unknown antiquity. 
 Thesst. 179 &'■ 7rep\ toutccv tcov 
 'HpaKXeiTeLoyv, fj Loo-rrep av keyeis 
 'Opr/peioov, Kal en TrakaioTepcov. 
 
 Steinhart imagines a reference 
 to the Pseudo-Orphic Fragment, 
 
 Zeis dpx'Q, Zevs peacra, Ai6s 8" etc 
 
 ndura reXetrru, which is elsewhere 
 quoted by Plato, Legg. 4, 7 1 5 e. 
 
 7. evos ovtos t£>v navrcov] 
 
 The participle, although agree- 
 ing in sense with TravTuv, follows 
 the number of the preceding 
 word. Cf. Protag. 329 d : epos 
 
 OVTOS TTJS dpeTTJS. 
 
 8. toIs pvOois] " In their tale 
 of the Universe ;" referring to 
 p,v66v nva supr. Cf. Theast. 
 156 c : ovtos 6 pvdns — viz. the 
 theory of Sensation. 
 
 'idbes — Moiio-ai] The word 
 vo-Tepov applies to the SiKeXai as 
 compared with the 'ld8es povaai. 
 Empedocles was later than 
 
20<M2TH2. 
 
 1 05 
 
 . 242. yioVCTOLL ^VVV€V01]Ka(TLV UTt (TUfJOrXcKftV d(T([)aX€(TTaTOV 
 
 e a.fx(j)0Tepa kcu Xeyetv a>? to bv 7roXXa re Kal kv £(ttiv, 
 £X@P a $* KaL 0*A/a avpe)(€Tai' Siafapofievov yap del 
 ljvfj.(f)€p€Tai, (jxxcriv at avvrovwrepat tcov M.ovo~cov' at 
 
 Heraclitus, and his speculation 
 is viewed by Plato as that of 
 Heraclitus in a less exact form. 
 See the speech of Eryximachus 
 in the Symposium, who treats 
 of Love in the spirit of Empe- 
 docles (187 a, b) : to ev cprjo-iv 
 
 ('HpuKXetros) 8ia(pepopevov avro 
 ai'TG) {-Vfxipepeo-dai, uxnrep appovlav 
 t6$-ov re Kal Xvpas. eo-ri 8e iroWrj 
 dXoyla appovlav (pdvai 8ia(pepe- 
 o~6ai t] €K 8ia(pepopevoov ert elvai. 
 dXX' 'laws rode tj3ovX(To Xeyeiv, 
 on £k 8ia(p(popevcov irporepov tov 
 o^eos Kal fiapeos, eneira varepov 
 opdXoyrjcrdvTav yeyovev vttu ttjs 
 p.ovo~iKrjs rexvr]s. The Words 
 
 770XX7) aXoyia in this extract are 
 a good comment on da<paXeo-Ta- 
 tov in the text. 
 
 1. gwcvorjcrav] I. e. In re- 
 flecting on both statements 
 perceived. Cf. Soph. (Ed. Col. 
 
 452 '• tovt eya>8a, Trjo~8e re 
 fiavreV aKovav ^uvvo&V re ra£ 
 epov 77a\al(paff dpol $oi/3os fjvv- 
 aev irore. 
 
 dacpaXeo~TaTov] " The most 
 irrefragable position." Cf. supr. 
 231 a : tov dacpaXr). Protag. 
 351 d, Polit. 262 b. 
 
 3. 8iaqbep6pevov — o-vpcp.) Sc. 
 to bv fj to irdv. Cf. Symp. 1. C. 
 
 4. o-WTOva>Tepai p.aXaKa>T(- 
 
 pai] These are musical terms, 
 as Boeckh has shewn in his 
 contribution to Heindorf's note 
 upon this passage : " Desumpta 
 vocabula o-wt. et paX. a colore 
 s. XP"? m niusicis generibus. 
 Etenim ex sex illis coloribus 
 unus in enharmonico, duo in 
 
 diiitonico, tres in chromatico 
 genere sunt. In chromate est 
 
 Color rjpioXi-os, color Tovtalos et 
 juaXoKos, s. rjpioXiov xpeopa, tovl- 
 aiov s. crvvrovov xpaipa et XP^P' 1 
 paXaKov. In diatono duo colores 
 Sunt Siutovov avvTovov et 8taTovov 
 p.aXciKov. Ilia crvvTOva Sunt ill— 
 tentiora, paXaKo. molliora. Eu- 
 clid. Introd. Harmon, p. 10, 11. 
 Aristox. Harm. Elem. I. p. 24 
 sqq. Gaudent. Harmon. Intr. 
 p. 17 : " Notandum autem illud 
 exdXaaav, quod est in musicis 
 in p.aXai<fi XP°9~" Eucl. p. 1 1 : 
 paXaKov 8e tov e'Xo^tfrrov ttvkvov 
 aaavTas Kal xP^P a -> eT«8^ to iv 
 ClVTCp TTVKVOV xpeojua dvleTcii Te Kal 
 eKkverai." Cf. also Rep. 3, 398 
 e : Tlves ovv paXaKul — tcov dp- 
 povicov. 'lao-Ti, r/ 8' os, Kal 
 XuSicrrt, a?Tives ^aXapat koXovv- 
 
 Tai, where the " soft Lydian 
 airs" are spoken of with a 
 metaphorical meaning. The 
 point here is that the union 
 of one and many was more 
 thorough in Heraclitus than in 
 Empedocles. A similar appli- 
 cation of these musical ex- 
 pressions is made by Aristotle, 
 Polit. IV. 3, in drawing a 
 parallel between music and 
 government, in both of which 
 he says the ordinary kinds are 
 divergences from the one or 
 
 two best : 7rapeK/3ucm?, tcis pev 
 tt/s ev KeKpape'vrjs dppovlas, Tas 
 8e Trjs dpLo~TT]s iroXiTelas, oXcyap- 
 XtKas pev tcis o~vvTovu>Tepas Kal 
 8eo"rroTiKa>Tepas, Tas 8' dvaptvas 
 Kal paXaKas 8rjpoTLKas. 
 
 i.y love 
 and then 
 Bevered by 
 hate, li--i\ e 
 
 ■ M.ii.- ,:n-|i 
 
 of them 
 his own 
 way. 
 
106 riAATftNOS 
 
 8e fjLa\aK(OT€pui to fxlv aei ravO' ovt(ds tx €LV e X"^ a " P* 2 -+ 2 
 crav, cV fxepei 8e Tore f±ev eu eivai (j)aai to ttolv koli 
 (j)[\ov vtt ' A^podiTt]?, rore 8e rroXXa koll iroXeiiLOv p. 243 
 avrb avrcp 8lol yet/coy tl. Tama 8e irdvTa d /iev 
 5 a\i]$a)9 Ttr r) purj tovtcov t'lprjKe, ^aXe7roi/, kcll ttXt]/!- 
 fxeXh- ovtq) fxeyaXa icXeivols kcll iraXaiols av8puaiv 
 iTTLTLfiav' tKtivo 8e aveirk^Oovov dTrotyrjvaaOaL. 
 
 0EAI. To Trolov ; 
 
 SE. Otl Xlav Tu>v ttoXXmv r]p.u)i> v7repi86i>T€s 
 loooXiyooprjcraW ovSev yap (f)povTLCTavT€s elr 67raKoXov- 
 Oovpiev ai)Tols Xeyovcnv elre caroXenropLeOa, Trepaivovcri 
 TO o-(f)€T€poi> aVTWV €KaO~TOl. 1) 
 
 0EAI. Ylas Xiyeis ; 
 
 For when S*E. 'OtCLV T19 CWTWV (pOeyljrjTCU XtyCDV 0)9 6CTTIV 
 
 they say , v * » \ ***** ' » Q 
 
 "Many," 157; yeyovev r\ yiyvtrai iroXXa rj eu rj dvo, koli oepp.ov 
 
 ■ One, 
 
 Two," av 
 
 the ad- 
 
 ■^rv\pw avyKtpai'i'VfAei'Oi', aXXoOl irrj 8iaKpLO-€is 
 
 5. x a ^ en ° v ] Sc. elirelv, which medy. Cf. Phsedr. 275 d, e. 
 
 is absorbed in what follows. 14. "Orav ris avra>v (pOeygrjrai] 
 
 Ka\ nXrjppeXes — (iriTifxav ] " When one of them utters his 
 
 Compare the structure of saying, 'Many, one, two, are, 
 
 Theset. 146 b : w dmo-relv, o>; have been born, are created,' 
 
 f'yw oljiai, ovre arii edeXrjcreis, ovre or speaks of heat interpenetrat- 
 
 Oefiis rrep\ ra roiavra dv8p\ crotpco ing with cold, while he else- 
 
 inLTaTTovTi veeorepov aTTeidelv. where postulates separations 
 
 6. ovtco [j-eydXa] Cogn. Ace. and combinations, I pray you, 
 Sc. to pr] dXtjdun ravra elprfnevcu. Thesetetus, do you at all then 
 " To make such grave accu- understand their meaning 1 " 
 sations against men of ancient Note the l-edundant participle, 
 renown." Heind. well compares as in ecprj Xeyw. 
 
 Legg. 10, 886 c : el pev els aX- as — irroTtdeis] There is 
 
 Xo ri koXcos 37 prj KaXat ex«, ol an emphasis on each of the 
 
 pdhiov emripqv TraXatols oiio-tv. words eariv, yeyove, ylyverai, 
 
 7. eKelvo] " That former 7roXXa, ev, 8vo, 6eppov, \}/v)(pcp, 
 thing," viz. what was implied SiaKplaeis, crvyKpio-eis. 
 
 in (vkoXcos k.t.X. 16. aXXodl tttj] Either, "in 
 
 9. V7repc86vres] "Looking over some other part of his treatise," 
 
 our heads." This was the error or " as taking place in some 
 
 which Dialectic, or the Socratic other region." For 6epp. \j/. 
 
 dialogue, was calculated to re- a-vyx., cf. Archelaus ap. Hippol. 
 
20<M2TH2. 
 
 107 
 
 243. kou avyKplcreLs viroTiOeis, tovtcov, co GeouVf/re, eKu- 
 crrore av ri irpbs Oecov £vi>i€i? 6 tl Xeyovatv ; eytw 
 pev yap ore pev rjv vecorepos, tovto fre^ to vvv diro- 
 povptevov birore tis eliroL, to /jltj ov, a.Kpi(3co? wpirjv 
 <~vvi£vai" vvv Se bpas %v la-p.lv avTov irepi ttjs 
 air op las. 
 c GEAI. 'Opu. 
 
 HE. Ta^a tolvvv taoof ovx tjttov KaTa, to ov 
 Tambv tovto irdOos ei\r}(j)6T€9 iv Tjj \j/v)(f) 7repl pcev 
 tovto eviropeiv (pap.ev K.a\ pavOdvetv oTTOTav ti? ovto 
 (j)0e'ytjr)Tai, irepl de Oarepov ov, irpbs ap.(poT€pa 
 
 OpLOLOOS €)(OVT€?. 
 
 GEAI. "lam. 
 
 HE. Kou 7repl tcov dXXcov 8rj tcov 7rpoeipr)p.evGov 
 y]plv TavTOv tovto eiprjaOco. 
 
 GEAI. Uavvye. 
 
 HE. Tcov piev tolvvv iroXXwv irept Ka\ p.€Ta tovto 
 orKe\j/6pL€0\ av Soijr), Trepl 8e tov peylaTov re Kal 
 d dpxoyov irpaoTOV vvv o-k€7tt60v. 
 
 mixturi "i 
 heat and 
 cold," 
 •■ are," 
 " have been 
 produced," 
 "come into 
 being," or 
 
 5 when they 
 speak of 
 the com- 
 position 
 and divi- 
 sion of 
 elements, 
 do we 
 understand 
 them? 
 
 10 Not-Being 
 may have 
 once ap- 
 peared an 
 intelligible 
 phrase, but 
 see where 
 it has 
 brought 
 us now. 
 5 Let us 
 therefore 
 turn and 
 examine 
 the most 
 cardinal of 
 all ideas, 
 that of 
 Being, 
 
 Ref. Haer. I. 9 : deppaivopev)]s 
 ttjs yrjs irpioTiov iv tco Karon pepei, 
 ottov to deppbv Kal to y^v^pov 
 ip-lcryeTo. 
 
 I. tovtcov] Neut. 
 
 3. tovto j~Tef] re is with- 
 out correlative : whence Herm. 
 conj. ye, which has no meaning, 
 Par. H. o-ov roVe, which cannot 
 be right, but suggests the conj. 
 tots ye. But, as the Bodleian MS. 
 omits to, it seems most likely 
 that to Avas first corrupted into 
 t«, and then again inserted. 
 Hence re is to be omitted. 
 Otherwise we must suppose 
 that the apodosis is absorbed 
 in the words ro^a tolvvv tVws 
 
 ovx t]ttov Kara to ov k.t.A. For 
 which, cf. Ph.sedr.265 d: els p.iav 
 re I8eav avvopcovTa ayeiv k.t.\. 
 
 5. iva ttjs aTropias] " What a 
 
 point Ave have reached in the 
 perplexity about Not-Being." 
 The article is used because the 
 difficulty attaching to the no- 
 tion of p.fj ov is by this time 
 familiar. 
 
 14. to>v aXXcov tcov Trpoeiprjpe'- 
 vcov\ yeyovos, yeveais, 7roXXa, iv, 
 8vo, Oeppov, yj/v^pov, 8iaKpio-eis, 
 avyKpiaeis. 
 
 1 8. Toil peylcTTOv Kal dp%riyov~\ 
 
 " The mightiest and chiefest." 
 Being is spoken of Avith pro- 
 found reverence, as in Rep. 6, 
 
108 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 in the 
 light ..I 
 existing 
 theories. 
 
 We first 
 interrogate 
 the philo- 
 sophers 
 who hold 
 that all is 
 resolvable 
 into two 
 ultimate 
 existences. 
 When they 
 say that 
 these two 
 exist, what 
 do they 
 mean ? 
 Do they 
 postulate 
 existence 
 as a third 
 element, 
 or identify 
 it with one 
 
 509 b, C '. ovk. ov(rias ovtos rod 
 dyadov, dXk' ert iireneiva rrjs ov~ 
 crias 7rpecr/3eta Kai dvvdpei imepe- 
 
 XOVTOS. 
 
 I. Tlvos ty Ae'yeis] " Sic seni- 
 
 jjer in responsione negligitur 
 prsegressa prepositio." Heind. 
 — Cf. Rep. 7? 53 1 d : rov wpooi- 
 
 jxlov — rj tlvos Xe'yeis ', 
 , 4. Kara 7roSa (sc. erropevos) J 
 
 " At the heels." " Following 
 my footsteps closely." (Cf. 
 Soph. (Ed. Col. 197 : iv — /3uo-« 
 fiaaiv dpfxoo-ai.) The plural Kara 
 ttoSos is the more usual form ; 
 hut the sing, occurs again 
 Legg. 11, 918 a: Ki@&r)\ois 8' 
 
 eTTiTrjdevpao-iv eWerat Kara. Tr68a 
 Ka~r)\e[as eniTrjSevpaTa. 
 
 6. avTu>v\ Probably em- 
 phatic, " as if the men them- 
 selves were personally present 
 here." 
 
 II. pr/ 8vo en Ka6 y u/xas] "And 
 
 no longer two according to 
 your theory." I. e. either, 
 " must we give up your theory 
 and make three principles in- 
 stead of two 1" or, " must we 
 understand you to assert three 
 principles instead of two V 
 The former way of taking the 
 words is more pointed, but 
 the latter is in better keeping 
 with the context, 
 
 14. dpeporepms] "Both ways." 
 I. e. either, " as Being is identi- 
 fied with one only, and as the 
 one term Being is predicated of 
 both alike" (the latter part of 
 this argument loses force when 
 the nature of predication is 
 clearly understood), or, perhaps 
 better, dpeporepas = "Whichever 
 of the two is identified with 
 Being." 
 
 BE A I. TtVo? 81) Xeyets ; ?/ Sr/Xov on to bv (ftys p. 243 
 irpcoTov Setv StepevvijaacrOai, t'l iro6' 61 AeyovTes avro 
 Si]Xovv i)yovvTaL ; 
 
 SE. Kara iroSa ye, co QealrrjTe, v7reXa(3e?. Xeyco 
 
 5 yap Si) ramrj 8eiv woielaOat ti]v pe6o8ov r)pas, oiov 
 avToov irapovTwv avanvvQavopevovs u>8e' ( l>e'pe, biro- 
 aoL 6epp.ov kol \J/vxpov rj Tive 8vo tolovtco ra iravT 
 elvai (j)are, t'l irore apa tovt eif afi(f)oiv (jjOeyyeade, 
 XeyovTes ap.(f)co Ka\ eKarepov elvai\ tl to eivai e 
 
 lotovto i)Tro\d$(j£>p.ev vpLcov ; irbrepov rplrov irapa ra 
 Svo eKelva, /cat rpia to ttolv, aXXa. p,r) Suo en Kad* 
 vp.a.5 TL0copev ; ov yap ttov toIv ye Svolv KaAovvres 
 OaTepov ov ap.<pOTepa bpolco? elvat XeyeTe' oyehbv 
 yap av ap(j)OTe'pco? eV, aAA' ov 8vo elniv. 
 
 15 6EAI. 'KXrjer) Xeyeis. 
 
20<M2TH2. 
 
 KM) 
 
 .244 
 
 243. ££E. 'AAA* apa to. ap(j)co (SovXeaOe KaXelv ov ; 
 
 GEAI. "Io-oy. 
 
 SE. AAA', w (f)lAoi, (f)r)aop.ev, kolv ovtco to. 8vo 
 XeyoiTO av aacjiearara ev. 
 
 GEAI. OpOoTaTa e'iprjKa?. 
 
 AE. 'E/Tei^?) tolvvv rjfieis 7]TTopi]Kapev, vpei? aura 
 rjp.lv €p,(f)avi(€Te iKavoos, t'l 7roT6 (3ovXea6e arjpLalveLV 
 ottotolv bv (pOeyyrjaOe. 8r/Aov yap 009 vpeh ptv tolvtcl 
 irakat ytyvcoaKere, -qpels 8e 7rpb rod plv cpop.e6a, vvv 
 8 i]iropr]Kapev. &5ao7cere ovv irpwTov tovt ocvto 
 rjpas, Iva pr/ Sotjafyopev pavOdveiv pev tol Xeyopeva 
 Trap vpcov, to 8t tovtov yiyvr/Tou irav TovvavTLOv. 
 b IfavTa 8rj Xeyovres re koll atJLodvTes it apa re tovtcov 
 Kai irapa tcov aXXcov, oaoi 7rXeiov evbs Xeyovai. to 
 ttolv elvai, p.cov, co ttol, tl 7rXrjppeXr}aop€v ; 
 
 GEAI. "H/acrra ye. 
 
 SE. T7 8e; irapa tcov ev to irav XeyovToov dp ov 
 
 7T€VOrT€Ol> CIS 8vVapiV TL 7TOT6 XtyOVCTL TO OV \ 
 
 GEAI. ITcoy yap ov; 
 
 jS?E. T68e tolvvv aTTOKpLveaOwaav. "E^ irov 
 
 which is 
 
 tan t ;l - 
 
 mount to 
 
 r 1 living 
 all into 
 one ? or 
 do they 
 give to 
 both the 
 one name 
 of [icing, 
 so making 
 both one '. 
 
 The same 
 argument.-* 
 '5 will apply 
 to all who 
 hold a plu- 
 rality of 
 natures. 
 
 Then let 
 those who 
 20 assert One 
 
 i . ' AAA' apa] Stallb. and Herm. 
 give apa. Cf. Kep. 2, 374 b. 
 " But perhaps you mean to 
 give the name to both toge- 
 ther ]" The Bodl. MS. gives 
 apa invariably, and is there- 
 fore of no use in deciding be- 
 tween apa and apa. 
 
 6. air a] This is the same 
 vague use of the neuter of avros 
 which is common inThucydides. 
 Cf. ravru infr. 1. 8. 
 
 9. aop.e6ci\ Sc. yiyvdoaicf a', 
 Cf. SUpr. 233 b: et /xijre dvre- 
 Xeyov opdws P-iyre ineivois e<pai- 
 
 VOVTO. 
 
 11. 8o£d£a>p.eu p.av8dvet,v p.ev\ 
 
 p.ev belongs to the two preced- 
 ing words taken as one. Cf. 
 
 Theset. 151b: pt] oo£cocr( ncos. 
 
 12. to 8e] "Whereas really. - ' 
 Cf. Thetet. 157 b: to 8' ov 8e?, 
 and note. 
 
 1 8. els 8vvap.iv] I.e. " So far 
 as is possible when they are not 
 present." Cf. Thetet. 184 a. 
 
 20. TdSe aTTOKpLveo-doia-ai/ ] 
 
 " Let them give an answer 
 to the following question." Cf. 
 Legg. 10, 901 c: Nw 8r) 8v' 
 
 owes rpio-iv rjplv ovaiv dnoKpi- 
 vdo~8aio~av. 
 
110 
 
 I7AATQN02 
 
 Being t.ll 
 
 UB what 
 
 the; mean 
 
 \r ■ Being 
 and Unity 
 two names 
 for the 
 same 
 thing ? 
 
 It will 
 
 puzzle 
 them to 
 answer 
 this, or in- 
 deed any 
 question. 
 
 For how 
 can there 
 be two 
 names, or 
 a name at 
 all, when 
 there is 
 nothing 
 beside the 
 One Being? 
 Unless the 
 
 (j)aT€ pouov tlvai ; ^apev yap, (j)i]0~ovcrii>. r) p. 244. 
 yap ; 
 
 0EAI. Nal. 
 
 HE. 1/ 6Y ; bv KaXeiTe tl ; 
 5 0EAI. No/. 
 
 HE. Iloreyoo^ O7T6/0 eV, eVf rco ai/rco Trpoa\ptopevoi c 
 5fOii» bvopacriv, ?) 7TGk ; 
 
 0EAI. TV's" 01)1/ avrol? r] fxera tovt , cb £eVe, 
 airoKpicris ; 
 10 HE. A^Ao^, to QeaiTrjTe, otl rco ramrju ttjv 
 viToOecriv inroOtfievw irpbs to vvv lpcoTr]6iv, koli Trpbs 
 dXXo 8e otlovv, ov irdvTcov pacrrov diroKpivao-Qai. 
 
 0EAI. Ylm; 
 
 HE. To re 8vo bvop.ara bpoXoyeiv eivai, pur)8ev 
 \5 0epevov irXrjv ev, KarayeXacrTov ttov. 
 
 GEAI. Ylm 8 ov; 
 
 HE. Kcu to Trapdirav ye aTroSeyeaOai tov Xeyov- 
 tos cos ecrTiv ovopLa tl, Xoyov ovk av e%ov. tl 
 
 6. onep ev\ Cf. the Aristo- 
 telian use of Bnep, e. g. Phys. 
 Ause. I. 3. 
 
 11. Ka\ Tvpb<; ciXXo Se otlovv] 
 
 "And not only so, but in an- 
 swer to any other question." 
 
 12. OV TTOLVTUiV pq0~T0v\ " Not 
 
 the easiest thing in the world." 
 Cf. supr. 2 1 8 c. I venture to 
 think that this is the true 
 reading also in Kep. 6, 497 d, 
 
 instead of ov irdvTcos pqo-Tov. 
 
 ndvTcos was the reading of Ste- 
 phanas (apparently with C E) 
 in this place, and of 2Y in 
 218 c. Cf. Legg. 6, 779 e : 
 
 ov navTcov evKo\a>Ta.Tov. 
 
 18. Xoyov ovk av ex ov \ C. F. 
 
 Hermann has reverted to the 
 reading of the old edd. Xoy. 
 
 ovk av ex.01. But it is unne- 
 cessary to alter exov, which is 
 the reading of the best MSS. 
 The participle corresponds to 
 
 the adjective KaTayeXaaTOV in 
 
 the previous clause : and av is 
 more forcible with the parti- 
 ciple (" is a thing which can- 
 not square with reason") than 
 it would have been here with 
 the optative (" would be un- 
 reasonable"): eo-ri, not ei'77, must 
 be supplied. Cf. Theaet. 164 a : 
 
 emaTTjptev tovtov yeyovev oimep 
 opav. Infr. 257 d : tovt ovv 
 dvuivvpov epovpev rj tw e'xov 
 e7Tcovvp.iav ; 6. exov. " This is 
 an admission which they can 
 never make consistently. For 
 if the name is other than the 
 
20M2TH2. 
 
 Ill 
 
 6EAI. Uy; 
 
 SE. TiOel? re Tovvopa rov TrpdypaTOS eTepov Svo 
 XeyeL irov Tive. 
 
 0EAI. Nai 
 
 iHE. Kat /x?7J> ai> tolvtov ye aura) 7^17 rovvopa, 
 i] /ArjSevo? ovo/jlol avayKaaO-qaeTai XeyuV el Be tlvos 
 avro (f)y]crei, orvfifirjcreTai to ovofia opo/jlclto? ovopa 
 fiovov, aXXov Be ovBevos bv ; 
 
 6EAI. OurfflS". 
 
 SE. Kai to ev ye, evos [ev] 6i> povov, koll tovto 
 ovo/jloltos ~favTO ev bv j". 
 
 name be 
 identified 
 with the 
 thing, in 
 w hich case 
 it i.s either 
 the- name 
 of nothing 
 or the 
 name of 
 itself, that 
 is, of a 
 name. 
 And Being 
 is but the 
 name of 
 One, which 
 is a name. 
 Further, 
 their One 
 Being is 
 
 thing, there are two : if the 
 same, the name either denotes 
 nothing, or itself only. Hence 
 if they admit that a name is 
 anything, their One Being be- 
 comes the name of a name." 
 
 6. r) /JLT]8ev6s el Se twos] 
 
 Change of construction for rj ei 
 
 TWOS. 
 
 IO. Kat to ev ye] "And (it will 
 
 result) that the One also is 
 only one of one, and this ' One 
 that is' again (tovto — av to ev 
 ov) (proves to be the name) of 
 a name." I.e. "Oneness is only 
 predicable of The One, and 
 this after all is but a name." 
 So, a little differently from 
 Heindorf, I would translate the 
 words as they stand (reading 
 av to). The omission of ep after 
 evos, as in nine MSS., hardly af- 
 fects the sense. Heindorf ren- 
 ders : " Atque unum, quatenus 
 est unius tantum unum, hoc 
 quoque nominis rursus unum 
 (das Eins eines Namens) esse 
 efficietur. Pendet enim etiam 
 postremum hoc bv a prcegresso 
 (rv/iiS^o-erat." The place seems 
 to be corrupt : but none of 
 
 the emendations hitherto made 
 are satisfactory. The Bod]., 
 
 with A i, has tov ovo/jlotos. 
 
 The MSS. give ovto ev ov. 
 
 Stallb. : Kcu ov ttov 6v6u.citos 
 avTO ev ov. 
 
 (This is not dialectic but 
 common sense.) 
 
 Herm. : evos ev bvofia ov, Kai 
 tovto ouofxaTos av to ev bv. 
 
 Badham : Kai to ev ye, evos 
 ev bv uovov <a\ tovto, 6v6u.aT0S 5' 
 
 ov to ev ov. But how does 
 this help to prove that all 
 questions are alike unanswer- 
 able on the Eleatic principle 1 
 Steinhart : ko\ to ov ye, evos 
 
 bv bvofxa, Ka\ tovtov ovtos ovofxa- 
 tos ovto ov bvofxa. 
 
 Wagner (in Rhein. Mus. XL 
 
 1857) : Kai T0 ° v 7 e * vos bvo/ia bv, 
 Ka\ tovto bvofiaros av to ovo/jlo bv. 
 
 The two last mentioned at- 
 tempt to resume and complete 
 the argument from rts ovv — 
 airoKpio-is. And it is clear that 
 the sentence contains an appli- 
 cation of the preceding remark 
 to the One Being. 
 
 Perhaps the words avro 
 ev bv may be the remains of 
 
11 2 
 
 IjAATONOS 
 
 conceived 
 aa Totality. 
 
 I '.ut if ii ' 
 be a \\ hole, 
 
 " Like 
 
 every way 
 unto a 
 rounded 
 sphere," 
 
 it then lias 
 parts, viz. 
 
 centre and 
 
 circumfer- 
 ence. And 
 that which 
 has parts 
 may be 
 one as par- 
 taking of 
 unity, but 
 cannot be 
 the same 
 with unity, 
 for unity is 
 without 
 parts. 
 
 0EAI. 'Amy/07. 
 
 p. 2. 
 
 aE. TV Se ; to oXov erepov tov ovtos €VOS y 
 tolvtov (j)yaovo-t tovtoj ; 
 
 GEAI. IT&j? yap ov (f)yaovo~t re koll (J)aatv ; e 
 
 5 HE. Ei to'lvvv oXov iariv, wcnrep koll Ylappevlby? 
 
 iruvToBev €vkvk\ov crcbaip}]? evaXtyKiov oyictp, 
 fieacroOev icro7raXeg iruvry' to ■yctjO ou tc ti /neii^ov 
 ov re ri (3atOTepov ireKevai yjpeov ecrri rrj ij t>7, 
 
 tolovt6v ye ov to ov p.€0~ov re koll eayara e'^ei, Tama 
 8e t\ov Tracra dvayKy ptepy tyeiv. y 7rco? ; 
 GEAI. Ovrm. 
 
 HE. 'AAAa fMyv to ye fxepepiapLevov iraQos pev p. 
 roD ivos e'xe^ eVi rot? p.epeai iraaiv ovSev airoKto- 
 S Auet, /cat TavTr) by ttolv re oi> /cat oAoz/ ei' eiVat. 
 GEAI. TIS ov: 
 
 245- 
 
 some marginal note (e. g. drrou 
 tov ivos, explaining dvouaTos), 
 and Plato may have written 
 Kal t6 eV ye e>6s e> 6VofJia 5V, 
 Kal touto ocojxaTOS. " And (it 
 will result) that the One also 
 is the one name of One, and 
 that of a name." I. e. Not 
 only is Being not another name 
 for Unity, or Unity for Being, 
 but Unity is the name only of 
 a name." The drift of the pre- 
 ceding argument is the fol- 
 lowing : 
 
 " Are IV and ov two names 
 for the same thing ] 
 
 " Are they even two names 1 
 Or can there be both name 
 and thing 1 ? 
 
 " Even the one name ev 
 can only be the name of a 
 name." 
 
 5. okov eorii/] Sc. TO ov. 
 
 So far unity has been attained 
 by merging all things in the 
 mere name h> ov. But is not 
 to okov still distinct from this 1 
 
 IO. uiaov re Kal eo-x aTa *X eL ] 
 Cf. Parni. 145 a : okov ov Kal 
 apx^v av e\oi Kal fiearov Kal Te- 
 kcvTrjv ; rj oiov Te ti okov eivai 
 uvev rpiav tuvtcov ' } K.T.k. 
 
 1 3. 7rd6os u.ev tov evbs €)(eiv] 
 " That which has parts may 
 indeed partake of unity in all 
 the parts (i. e. may have unity 
 impressed on them), and being 
 thus an All and a Whole may 
 be in this way one." For the 
 distinction of rrav and okov, see 
 Theset. 204, which passage Plato 
 may have thought of here. The 
 words 7rd0os and irdo-xetv are 
 used in the same sense also in 
 Parmen. 147, alib. See Grote's 
 Plato, vol. ii. pp. 303-306. 
 
20M2TH2. I 1 S 
 
 245. HE. To 8e ireirovOos ravra up ovk uSvvcitov avro 
 ye to ev olvto elvai\ 
 
 0EAI. Um; 
 
 HE. 'Apepe? 8rj wov 8et wavTeAco? to ye dArjOcos 
 ev kclto, tov opObv Xoyov elprjcrdai. 5 
 
 0EAI. Aei yap ovv. 
 b HE. To Se ye tolovtov £k ttoXXcov pepcov ov ov 
 o-vjj.(f)Govr}crei tco Xoycp. 
 
 9EAI. MavOdvco. 
 
 S*E. TioTepov 8r) irdOos eypv to *6v* rou eVo? 10 is Being 
 
 (■/ r/ 3/ \ <•/,. ,\ / \ -. / then one 
 
 ovtco? ev re eo~Tcti /cat oaoj>, 77 TTavTcmacn pr) Xeyccpev only by 
 
 cf -y \ v participa- 
 
 oAoz> eivai TO ov ; tion, or 
 
 0EAI. XaAe7n)i> TTpo(3el3XrjKa9 dlpeaiv. say that 
 
 HE. ' AXrjOe'aTaTa pevTOi Aeyeis. ireirovOos re yap ^Xt 
 
 whole ? 
 
 for- 
 
 v A t \ 9 / > j \ ,\ ~ « \ j / \ whole 
 
 ro ov e^ eu>at 7ra>?, oi> tolvtqv ov tco evi (patveTcti, koli 15 i n the 
 
 \/ ?< x ^ ' t \ 3/ mer case 
 
 TrAeova or) tcl ircivTa evos ecrrat. Being ig 
 
 GEAI. Na/. 
 
 1. To Se nenovBos ravra] agree in giving oXoi>, but 6i>, 
 Compare the language of Parm. the correction of Schleier- 
 147 c-148 c: >? erepov ehai rnacher, is absolutely required. 
 7rej7op6e ra>v aXkav, Ka\ raKKa The same corruption occurs in 
 eKeivov ao-avrcos, ravry ravrbv av Prot. 36 1 b. The Bodleian, 
 •neirovBora elev to re ev rols ctXkois by giving rco oAo> Xdyw just 
 Ka\ raXKa rw ivi k.t.X. above, betrays the tendency 
 
 2. to $v avro ehai] The which has produced the error, 
 pronoun avro is added where Cf. Thea?t. 149 c, droKois (Bodl. 
 the subject has been thrown droirois with dronararo? above) : 
 back to the beginning of the lb. 158 c, 6V<a XPV (Bodleian 
 sentence, as in Rep. 5,477 d: ora XP° V( ? XP*1> with xP° V0V 
 eTno-rrjfxTjv -norepov dvvapiv riva below). 
 
 (pfjs eivai avTrjv ; 1 3. XaXenfju — atpeo~iv\ Cf. 
 
 IO. Uorepov £77] I. e. " Is Theset. 196 c: "Anopov aipeaiv 
 
 Being one only by participa- npoTidrjs, w 2co/c/jare<r. Legg. 9, 
 
 tion in unity, and a whole in 858 a: TeXoiav, S> £eve, irporide- 
 
 this way, or is Being not to peda rrjv alpecriv. 
 be thought of as a whole at 14. 'AXijd^o-rara pevroi \eyeis] 
 
 all?" "You are right. It is truly 
 
 distinct 
 from Unity 
 
 tov evoi 
 
 bs] The MSS. difficult, 
 
114 
 
 IIAATQNOS 
 
 and there 
 arises 
 a plurality 
 of ele- 
 ments. 
 Ami in the 
 latter case, 
 supposing 
 a whole 
 to exist, 
 there exists 
 something 
 outside of 
 Being : and 
 moreover 
 there is 
 again 
 plurality. 
 
 HE. Kai p.i)v edv ye rb ov f) firj oXov 8ia to ire- p. 245 
 
 TTOvOlvai TO VTT €K€Ll>OV 7TO.0O9, fj 8e OLVTO TO 0X0V, C 
 
 ivSee? to ov eavTOv ijvp.(3alv€i. 
 0EAI. Tldvv ye. 
 5 SE. Kcu koltol tovtov 8rj tov Xoyov eavTov crTepb- 
 \xevov ovk ov eaTou to ov. 
 0EAI. Ovrm. 
 
 SE. Kcu evos ye av irXem tol iravTa yiyveTai, 
 tov Te ovtos /ecu tov oXov x^P^ i8iav eKdTepov (f)V- 
 locrtv eiXrjtyoTO?. 
 6EAI. Nat. 
 
 HE. M?) ovtos 8e ye to irapdirav tov oXov, Tamd 
 Te TavTa virdpyei ra ovtl kcu 7rpbs tg> pj] eivcu p.rj8' d 
 av yeveadai ttotI ov. 
 '5 0EAI. T/&J; 
 
 HE. To yevoptevov ae\ yeyovev oXov, ScrTe ovtc 
 
 i. fj fxrj S\ov] The order of 
 words is inverted, as so often 
 happens in this dialogue, pro- 
 bably in order to point the 
 antithesis by giving emphasis 
 to \il). " If Being is not a whole 
 through parcicipating in unity, 
 and the nature of the whole 
 exists, Being then falls short 
 of Being" (does not contain all 
 that exists). 
 
 Is Being abstract or con- 
 crete 1 If abstract, Being is 
 not a whole, or finite. If con- 
 crete, Being is separate from 
 abstract Unity. In the latter 
 case there are two principles. 
 In the former, (a) if a whole 
 exists, not only are there two 
 principles, but something ex- 
 ists apart from being : and 
 (/3) if a whole does not exist, 
 Being could never have come 
 
 to be, for what has come to 
 be is completed as a whole. 
 This last argument is much in 
 the spirit of the Parmenides. 
 Compare also Phileb. 15 b: 
 
 nebs (del vndXaufidvetv) p.iav eKa- 
 arrjv ovcrav del 7-171/ avrrjv /cat pr]re 
 yeveaiv pyre oXedpov Trpocrde)(o- 
 pevrjv, o/xcoy elvai fteftaiorara piav 
 
 ravrqu. The Eleatic would of 
 course reply that he denies 
 yeveo-is altogether. And so 
 Plato would have reasoned at 
 an earlier time. 
 
 12. ravrd re ravra VTrdp^et rco 
 6W1] ovk ov eari kcu 7r\eia> 
 
 evos. Compare the language 
 of the Parmenides. Bodl. 
 
 ravra re ravra. 
 
 I 6. yeyovev o\ov\ Cf. Parm. 
 153 C .' Kai prjv popid ye (prjcro- 
 aev ravr elvai rrdvra rdWa rov 
 oXov re Ka\ eVoV, avro be eKelvo 
 
20<i>irrH2. 
 
 245. overlap ovre yevecnv coy ovaav Set irpoaayopeveiv '\ro 
 ev 77-j- to oXov ev rols overt, /jltj riOevra. 
 
 0EAI. YlavTairaaLv eoiKe ravO' ovto)? e^etv. 
 
 £JE. Kal /jltjv ovS" birocrovovv ti Sec to /jitj oXov 
 elvai- ttoctov tl yap ov, ottoctov av fj, toctovtov oXov 
 avayKalov elvai. 
 
 0EAI. KofitBrj ye. 
 
 SE. Kal TOivvv aXXa ptvpla airepavrovs a7roplas 
 e eKaarov eiXrjtybs (paveirat rco to bv etre hvo rive elre 
 ev fiovov elvai Xeyovn. 
 
 0EAI. ArjXoi o~xe$oi> Kal to. vvv virofyaivovTa' 
 o-vvdirTeraL yap erepov etj dXXov, /j.e[^co Kal \aXe- 
 ircoTepav (f)epov irepl tcov efiirpocrOev ael prjdevrcov 
 TrXavrjv. 
 
 £?E. Tovs jmu tolvvv hiaKpiftoXoyovixevovs OVTOS 
 
 Sfia rfj rekevTrj yeyovevai ev re 
 
 km. oXov. I. e. the use of the 
 aorist yev6p.evov implies that 
 an action has been completed. 
 Cf. Theset. 155 b, c. 
 
 1. fro ev jjf] These words 
 are in all the MSS., but there 
 can be little doubt that they 
 arise either from a gloss or 
 from some corruption of the 
 text. Heindorf conjectured 
 -rot/ to okov, which is probably 
 right. 
 
 8. aXka fivpla] " You know 
 that innumerable other points 
 will each be found involved in 
 endless difficulties." Cf.Theset. 
 
 155 c j d : Kal SX\a 8r] p.vpia eVi 
 [Jivpiois ovras e%ei, e'lnep Kal raiira 
 
 TrapaSegoneda. For an illus- 
 tration of the truth of this 
 Plato would point to the Par- 
 menides. 
 
 12. erepov i£ ciXKov] For the 
 
 variety, cf. Phileb. 57 b : apa 
 
 eWi tis erepas ciWr] Kadapmrepa 
 e7no-rrjp.t]s iiuo-TT)pri. And for 
 irepl twv e\mpoo~6ev k. t. A., 
 Theset. 177 c: nXeico del eirip- 
 peovra Karaycocret fj/xcov tov eg 
 dpxrjs Xoyov. 
 
 Ift.Tovs pev Tolvvv K.r.A.] "Well 
 then, concerning those who 
 treat exactly of Being and 
 Not-Being, let so much suffice, 
 although the subject is by no 
 means exhausted. We must 
 now turn and look at others 
 who speak less precisely, that 
 we may learn from the most 
 general survey that Being is 
 no less troublesome to com- 
 prehend than Not-Being." 
 
 "Let us approach them, then. 
 Proceed." 
 
 " I see them, through their 
 dispute about the nature of 
 Being, engaged in a warfare 
 
 But if 
 there is no 
 
 5 Whole, not 
 only must 
 there be 
 plurality, 
 (for then 
 Being is 
 not One) 
 but Being 
 cannot 
 have come 
 
 10 into being, 
 still less 
 exist, for 
 nothing is 
 completed 
 but as a 
 whole. 
 Nor can 
 Being have 
 number, 
 5 for, what- 
 ever num- 
 ber it has, 
 it has this 
 as a whole, 
 or sum. 
 
 Q 2 
 
IK) 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 re 7repi kcu }JLi) iravv [ilv ov ditAi]AuOafi€i>, ujicos 5e p. 245 
 
 which resembles thai of the 
 
 ( Hauls and the < k)ds." 
 •• What do you mean I" 
 •■ The one faction would drag 
 everything to Earth out of 
 the Heaven of the Unseen, 
 literally laying their grasp on 
 rocks and trees. For they 
 fasten upon everything of this 
 kind, and contend uncompro- 
 misingly that this alone exists 
 Avhich affords resistance and is 
 sensible to the touch : so they 
 define Being and Body to be 
 the same. But they utterly 
 despise the rest of the world, 
 whoever asserts that a bodiless 
 thing has being, and, on hear- 
 ing this, refuse to listen to 
 another word." 
 
 " They are indeed a fearful 
 sort of men. I have encoun- 
 tered many of them myself, 
 ere now." 
 
 " Yes, and that is why their 
 opponents are so cautious in 
 their defence, and fight with 
 them from some invisible aery 
 hold, contending in spite of all 
 that True Being consists of 
 certain bodiless forms, seen 
 only by the mind : but the 
 bodies to which the others 
 cling, and the realities of 
 which they speak, these little 
 by little in their arguments 
 disintegrate and crumble 
 down, and describe them as 
 not substance but a moving 
 flux of change. Between these 
 armies from time immemorial 
 a battle has been joined, 
 which continues with unabated 
 fury." 
 
 (l5-) diaKpij3oXoyovpevovs — aX- 
 
 Xcos XeyovTas] In the former 
 class are obviously contained 
 
 all who have hitherto been 
 mentioned — the Ionics, Elca- 
 tics, Heraclitus, Empedocles : 
 and the word ouixp. probably 
 
 means " those who have defined 
 precisely the number and the 
 kinds of being." Cf.supr. 243 d : 
 
 aims TTconore eVi Kplcriv copprjae 
 rov ra ovra 8iopicracr6ai trnaa re 
 Kai nold ecrriv. It is less certain 
 who are spoken of as diaicp. 
 ■rrepl tov pj ovtos. Perhaps the 
 prohibition of Parmenides is 
 alone referred to, perhaps 
 Leucippus may be also in- 
 tended. It does not seem 
 probable that Gorgias, Pro- 
 tagoras, Antisthenes, or the 
 Megarians (as Heindorf sup- 
 poses) are included in this ex- 
 pression. The contemporaries 
 of Socrates seem to be reserv- 
 ed, with those of Plato, for the 
 following section (p. 246). The 
 meaning of aXXcos is best infer- 
 red from that of 8m/cpt/3oXoyou- 
 pevovs, to which aXXcos Xeyoi>ra<; 
 
 is opposed. "Those who speak 
 with less exactness." " Those 
 who do not seek to determine 
 the number or the kinds of 
 Being." The schools which are 
 now to be described are in 
 truth engaged with a different 
 problem : respecting the nature 
 of Being or Essence, whether 
 this be ideal or corporeal — a 
 question with which mathe- 
 matical or numerical exactness 
 has little to do. For a simi- 
 lar use of aXXws, cf. Hdt. V. 
 
 8 : oXXcos yfj Kpv\p-avres. Crat. 
 425 a: f/pus Se del etWp rexvi- 
 kcos iniarrjC-upeBa (TKOTre'icrdcu avrci 
 ndvTcij ovtco BLeXopevovs, e'tre Kara 
 Tponov rd T€ 7Tpu>Ta ovopara K€~L- 
 7ai Kai tci vrrrepct, eire prj, ovtui 
 
2CXM2TH2. 
 
 117 
 
 245- WWtwSs €)(€T(O m TOV? §6 CtAAcO? XtyOVTOLS (XV 0€aT€OV, 
 IP €K TTOLVTWV el8cOfJL€l' OTl TO OV TOV fXJJ OVTOS OvStV 
 
 246. eviropcoTepov efareiv o ri ttot ecrTiv. 
 
 GEAI. Qvkovv TropeveaOai xprj koll im tovtov?. t 
 
 flE. Kcu fX1]V €01K€ y€ Iv aVTols olov yiyaVTO- 5 We pro- 
 ceed to 
 
 Bedadai. aXXws 8e avveipetv prj 
 <pav\ov fj Ka\ ov na8' 686v, co (pl\e 
 'Eppoyeves, where aWats = prj 
 8ieXo/xevovs, as here it is = prj 8ia- 
 KpifioKoyovfxivovi , in both places 
 with a touch of blame, which 
 is here satirically directed by 
 Plato against the philosophers 
 who were most nearly con- 
 temporary with himself. See 
 also Legg. i, 635 e, where 
 all other existing common- 
 wealths are distinguished from 
 the Spartan and Cretan con- 
 stitutions in the words ri 81a- 
 (pepov ev ravrais rals TroXiTeuus 
 7} tcus top eiKY] TroXiTeuojxeVojt' 
 dvevprjO-opev. 
 
 (i.) iravv pev ov 8ie\r]\vda.pev] 
 
 " We most certainly have not 
 exhausted — ." waw is ad- 
 verbial to the phrase ov bie\rj- 
 \vdapev. navTas, which Hein- 
 dorf adopted from the quo- 
 tation of EusebiuSj is less 
 forcible. Cf. Prot. 338 e, 
 
 iravv pev ovk fjdeXev, quoted by 
 Stallbaum, who, notwithstand- 
 ing, rejects the MS. reading 
 here because it is not literally 
 true that the early philoso- 
 phers had been not at all dis- 
 cussed : " Eecensuit enim non- 
 nullos quanquam non omnes 
 tetigit." But StfAr/A. implies 
 either going through them all, 
 or discussing them thoroughly. 
 Phileb. 51 c : Trdvv pev ovv ovk 
 evdvs SijAci io~Tiv. — neipcniov 
 
 pr)v. See an instructive note 
 
 on ov ttuvv in Mr. Cope's Gor- 
 gias. 
 
 2. ix ndvrav] As the result 
 derived from all, the same 
 which has now been derived 
 from a part only. Cf. Theaet. 
 1 7 1 c, e£ cmavTcov, and note ; 
 Ar. Met. VII. 998 a; and vid. 
 infr. 251c: iva roivvv Trpbs dnav- 
 tcls Tjplv 6 Adyos 7/ K.T.X. 
 
 OTl TO OV TOV pi] OVTOS ] 
 
 This notion was advanced with 
 some hesitation supr. 242 c : 
 prj ttt] TeTapaypevoi pev 3>pev. 
 243 C : Tdxa to'lvvv 'laws k.t.X., 
 and is more decidedly enforced 
 infra 250 d. 
 
 5. yiyavTnuaxia] Plato notices 
 
 amongst contemporary philo- 
 sophers a conflict between ma- 
 terialists and idealists, which 
 he compares to the war of the 
 Giants with the Go^s : the 
 terrible children of the earth 
 are seen hurling blind defi- 
 ance at their opponents, who 
 fortify themselves securely 
 from this rude violence in an 
 invisible Heaven. In a similar 
 spirit, in the Politicus, p. 291 a, 
 the statesmen of the day are 
 compared to Centaurs and 
 Satyrs and other monstrous 
 forms. See Coleridge's Friend, 
 vol. iii. p. 129. — The mate- 
 rialist has no way upwards 
 His " element is below." The 
 idealist finds his way up, but 
 not down again. 
 
118 
 
 I1AATQN02 
 
 examine a 
 different 
 order of 
 philosophic 
 
 schools, 
 
 Bomewhat 
 
 in their 
 announce- 
 ments, 
 
 whose end- 
 less conflict 
 respecting 
 the nature 
 of essence 
 resembles 
 that of the 
 Giants 
 with the 
 Gods. 
 The advo- 
 cates of a 
 bodilyprin- 
 ciple,whose 
 touchstone 
 is the sense 
 
 jxaxia T19 eivai 8 to. ti)v a/i(f)i(Tfir)T7)(nv irep\ ttjs P- 246. 
 ovcrLas irpos aXX^Xovs. 
 0EAI. n<Sff; 
 
 SE. Ol fxeu els yrjv itj ovpavov kcll tov uopdrov 
 Siravra eXKOuat, reus" \<cpo~\v v-Ttyyws irerpas kcu Spvs 
 TrepiXapLfiavovTes. rwu yap toiovtojv tya-KTQp.tvoi 
 iravTOdv hilayypiipvTai tovto thai \xovov o irapiyzi 
 TrpoafioXyv kcu eira^iqv tlvol, tolvtov crcofia koll ovoiav 
 6pi(pp.evoi, tcop <5e aXXcov, e'l tis (f)rjcri firj acopta ^x ov ^ 
 toeivai, KOLTa<ppovovvT€$ to irapajrav koll ov8ei> eOe- 
 Xovres aXXo aKoveiv. 
 
 0EAI. 'H Seivovs eipr/Kas avbpas' rjdr/ yap Kal 
 eyco tovtoov avyyols 7rpoaerv)(ou. 
 
 I. TTep\rr]S ovaias] No longer 
 
 tov ovtos. This change of ter- 
 minology indicates that we are 
 entering on a new and more 
 abstract phase of philosophy. 
 
 5. eXKovcn] " Drag by main 
 force." The word is often 
 used to indicate perversity in 
 argument. Cf. iufr. d : rav els 
 o~a>pa iravra eXKOvrcov /3tg. ov- 
 pavos is elsewhere identified by 
 Plato with the visible region, 
 e. g. Rep. 6, 5°9 e : Sparov, Iva 
 
 pfj ovpavov elirav 8okS> croi ao(pi- 
 £eadac Trepl to ovopa. Earth 
 and Heaven are here opposed, 
 as there the visible and intel- 
 lectual worlds. 
 
 dre^vcos irerpas Kai 8pvs irepi- 
 Xapftdvovres] C. F. Hermann 
 inserts as before ireTpas. This 
 is quite unnecessary, and takes 
 from the liveliness of the image. 
 The metaphor is continued, and 
 the materialists are said, like 
 the earth-born monsters, to lay 
 their grasp on rocks and trees 
 
 in their warfare. In Hesiod it 
 is the hundred-handed sons of 
 Heaven and Earth, the allies of 
 Zeus, who throw the rocks up- 
 on the Titans. Theog.675-7 15. 
 But see Hor.Od.III. 4 : evulsis- 
 que truncis Enceladus jaculator 
 audax. irerpa Kal 8pvs are also 
 in Homer the symbols of in- 
 animate nature, as in the line 
 quoted by Socrates in his De- 
 fence : ov yap djrb 8pvos rjXvdov 
 ovd' dno Trirprjs. Cf. Rep. 8, 
 544 e : rj o'lei eK 8pvos iroBev 77 Ik 
 nerpas ras noXiTelas yiyveaduL ; 
 
 6. i(paTrT6pevoi] " Fastening 
 upon all such objects" (for the 
 purposes of their argument). 
 
 Q. rav 8e ciXXav, ei tis (pr]0~ij 
 
 " But, utterly despising all 
 others, whosoever says that 
 what has not body exists, and 
 refusing to hear from them an- 
 other word." Stephanus added 
 ti, which is found (after tis) in 
 C. H. re. B. 
 
 13. av^vols TTpoo-ervxov] Cf. 
 
2CM>I2TH2. 
 
 119 
 
 246. SE. Toiyapovv oi irpos olvtovs dfj.(l)ta^r]TovvT€9 
 fiaXa evXaffcos avwOev eh dopdrov 7ro6ev dfAvvovTou, 
 vorjTa OLTTa kou daco/xara elSrj fiiatpiievoi. ri]V dXrj- 
 6ivrjv ovaiav eivai' rd 8e eKelvcop acofxara kou ttjv 
 Xeyop.evr]v vtt clvtwv dXrjOetau Kara a lllk pa Sia- '. 
 c Opavovres kv rot? Xoyois yevecriv dvr ovaiav (fiepo- 
 \x(vr\v riva irpoaayopevovaLi/. eV fxeacp 8e irep\ 
 ravra aVAero? dfKporepwv \xdyr) tis, 00 Qeacryre, dei 
 £vv£<jtt\k£v . 
 
 GEAI. 'AXrjOij. 
 
 HE. Hap' dfifpolv Toivvv tolv yevolv Kara fxepo? 
 Xafioo/Aev Xoyov virep rj? Tidevrai rr\<s overlap. 
 
 GEAI. Ylws ovv 81] Xrj^ofieOa ; 
 
 Cratyl. 429 d : 7 Ap" on -^ivSt) 
 
 Xeyeiv to ivapdirav ovk eariv, apd 
 o~oi tovto Bivarai 6 Ao-yos ; avxvol 
 yap nves oi Xeyovres, Si (plXe Kpa- 
 rvXe, Kai vvv Ka\ irdXat. 
 
 (13.) Trpoo-iTvxov] So the Zur. 
 editors. Heincl. and Stallb., 
 with some MSS., trepiiTvxov. 
 " Encountered" suits the pas- 
 sage better than " lit upon." 
 
 1. Toiyapovv] Sc. are deivol 
 ovres. 
 
 2. pdXa evXaP&s] " With ex- 
 cellent heed." In fact never 
 crossing weapons with their 
 opponents. For each denies 
 the existence of that by which 
 the other holds. 
 
 3. fHiago/ievoi] " Contending 
 vehemently in spite of all diffi- 
 culties ;" like eXKovres above. 
 Cf. supr. 241 e : /3ia£e (T&u to re 
 p.r) w cjs ecrn Kara, n ko\ to ov av 
 irdXiv cos ovk ecrn 7177, i. e. u to 
 force the conclusion even against 
 the authority of Parmenides." 
 
 4. ttjv Xeyopevrjv — dXrjdeiav] 
 
 " The reality of which they 
 
 speak." alrjdeia, = reality, seems 
 to have been a favourite term 
 with the opponents of ideal 
 philosophy in Greece. Cf. 
 Theset. 152 d and note. 
 
 5. Kara apiKpa biadpavovres iv 
 toIs \6yois] Cf. Theeet. 179 d : 
 
 Tvpoo~ireov ovv iyyvrepco, Ka\ <r/ce- 
 irreov tt)v <pepop.evrjv ravTTjv ovaiav 
 biaKpovovra, e'lre vyus ('Its tradpbv 
 (fideyyerai. 
 
 7. iv pecrco 8e irepl ravra] 
 
 " Betwixt these armies on this 
 theme is waged an endless 
 war." 
 
 8. aTrXeros P^XI — <*"] Cf. 
 
 Legg. 1 o, 906 a, of the conflict 
 between good and evil : pdxq 
 
 8rj, (papev, dddvaros io~Tiv rj toi- 
 
 ai>Tr). Phileb. 15 e : tovto ovre 
 p.T] iravcriTal wore ovre ijp^aro 
 VVV. Tim. 28 a: vTTep rjS Ttdev- 
 Tai Trjs ovo-ias. I. e. vnep Trjs 
 ovo-'ias, r)v TidevTCU. 
 
 12. Xd^copev Xoyov] Cf. Theset. 
 
 1 6 1 b : Xoyov nap' eTepov cro0ov 
 Xa^etz/. Meno 7 O d : Xappdveiv 
 Xoyov KaliXeyxe iv. Rep. I, 337 b. 
 
 thing to ' 
 earth out 
 of the hea- 
 ven of the 
 
 Unseen. 
 From 
 
 thence an 
 army, 
 " lapped 
 in proof 
 eterne," 
 carefully 
 defend 
 their aiiry 
 citadel of 
 , bodiless 
 forms, and 
 by their 
 arguments 
 reduce to 
 a flux of 
 transitory 
 production 
 
120 
 
 I1AATON02 
 
 the seem- 
 ing reality 
 of yonder 
 
 l)0ilily sub 
 stance. 
 
 The prin- 
 ciples of 
 either 
 school are 
 called in 
 question, 
 and Thea?- 
 tetus en- 
 gages to 
 impart 
 to the 
 Stranger 
 the tenor 
 of their 
 replies. 
 
 HE. Ylapa filv tcov ev eldeaiv avTifv TiOefievcav p. 24C 
 paov' i)fiepc£>TepoL yap' irapa. 8e tcov els acofia iravTa. 
 4\k6vtcou (3la yaXeiroiTepov, taco? <5e kou <x;(e<$oi> d 
 aSvvarov. a A A' d>8e poi <5eu> 8ok€l wept olvtmv 
 S 8pav. 
 
 0EAI. n«?; 
 
 HE. MaAiara /LteV, el ttt\ 8vvaTov rjv, epyco /3eA- 
 t'lovs avTov? iroieZv el Be tovto ptrj eyyozpel, Aoyw 
 
 7TOL(Ofiei>, V7T0TL$e'fiei>0l VOpLipLCQTepOV OLVTOV9 7} vvv 
 
 loedekovras av anroKpivacrQai. to yap bpLoXoyqOev 
 irapa fieXTLovcDV irov Kvpicarepov y to irapa. \ €L P°~ 
 vcov' rjixeh 8e ov tovtcov (f)povTi£op.ei>, aAAa Tak-qOes 
 
 ^QTOV/JLeV. 
 
 0EAI. 'OpOoTaTa. e 
 
 15 HE. KeAeue 8rj tov? (3e\Tiovs yeyovoTa? diro- 
 KplvaaOai aoi, Kal to XeyOev Trap avT&v a(pep- 
 fxrjveve. 
 
 3. ^aX€7ra)Tepoi'] The diffi- 
 culty of arguing with these 
 men is different from that 
 found with the Ephesian piov- 
 res, who could not be made to 
 dwell on an idea, and arises 
 simply from their want of dia- 
 lectical refinement. Cf. Thefet. 
 155 e: eicri yap, S> ttcu, p.a\' ev 
 ap.ovo~oi. 
 
 g. vop.ip.a>Tepov] I. e. More in 
 accordance with the acknow- 
 ledged rules of argument. 
 
 IO. to yap opokoyrjdtv x (L ~ 
 
 povav] For the serious applica- 
 tion of this principle, cf. Legg. 
 
 2, 663 C : rfjv 8' aKrjdeiav rrjs 
 Kpio-ecos TTorepav Kvpiatrepav eivai 
 (fiCvpev ' } norepa rrjv rrjs xapovos 
 yfrvxrjs rj ttjv rrjs fteXriovos ; 'Av- 
 ayicaiov nov ttjv tt)s dpelvovos. 
 12. rjpets he ov tovtcop cppovri- 
 
 Cop.ev\ Cf. Phsedo 91c: av epol 
 Treidrjade, apiKpa. cppoi/Ticravres 
 "S,u>Kparovs, ttjs 8e dXrjBeias 7ro\v 
 paXXov, eav ftev n 8okS> dXrjdes 
 Xe'yeiv, ^wop,o\oyr]o-eTe, el 8e pr], 
 ttclvti \6ycp di/TiTeipere. Plato 
 sometimes insists on the neces- 
 sity of individual conviction, 
 as in Protagoras 331 c (oi8ev 
 
 yap Seo/xai to el ftovXei tovto /cat 
 el aoi 8oKel eXey^eo-daL a\A' ifie 
 re Kai (re), Gorg. 472 b, 4*74 
 a, b ; sometimes, as here, on 
 consistency of argument alone. 
 The former is the Socratic, 
 the latter the Platonic, mode 
 of asserting the supremacy of 
 reason. 
 
 1 6. Trap' gvtcov] The preposi- 
 tion is introduced because of the 
 verb dqbeppfiveve. " Convey from 
 them to me the tenour of their 
 
2CWI2TH2. 
 
 121 
 
 246, 
 
 247^ 
 
 0EAI. Tavr earou. 
 
 SfE. Aeyovroov 8rj dvqrov (coov el (f)aa)u ei- 
 vai TL. 
 
 0EAI. ILSy $ oti; 
 
 3*E. Touto 8e ou aco/ia epi^rvxov bjioXoyovaiv ; 5 
 
 8EAI. Udvv ye. 
 
 HE. TiOevres rt rcou ovtodv tyvyfjv ; 
 
 0EAI. Nat. 
 
 SE. T7 8e ; tyvyrjv ov tyjv fiev StKalav, rr)v Se 
 aSiKov (fyacrtv eivou, kou tt]v fiev (frpovifiov, ttjv 8ei 
 a(ppova ; 
 
 0EAI. Ti/iiyy; 
 
 HE. 'AAA' ou SiKouocrvvT)? eljei kou "jirapovaia^ 
 ToiavTrjv olvtwv eKaaTr]v yiyvecrOou, kou tcov evavTiwv 
 rr\v evavriav ; 1 
 
 0EAI. Nat, KOU TCLVTa ^VfJLCJXXOrtV. 
 
 HE. 'AAAa p.^v to ye Svvoltov tco irapayiyveo-Qou ™?? he 
 kou airoyiyveaOaL iravTms elva'i n (^r]crovo~iv. 
 0EAI. Qaal p.ev ovv. 
 
 The coi [•'•- 
 reali 1 are 
 the more 
 difficult, 
 
 Imt.-iu-.- i.l 
 
 tliuir dia- 
 lectical 
 rudenes8 
 and incom- 
 petence. 
 For the 
 sake of ar- 
 gument we 
 must ima- 
 gine them 
 capable of 
 making a 
 wholesome 
 answer. 
 They ad- 
 mit, then, 
 the exist- 
 ence of a 
 mortal liv- 
 ing crea- 
 ture, which 
 is a body- 
 containing 
 a soul. 
 Soul, then, 
 exists: and 
 
 righteous 
 or un- 
 righteous, 
 wise or un- 
 
 b HE. Ovam OVV SlKaiOaVVr)? KOU (hpOVnaeWS KOU 20 wise, ac- 
 
 cording as 
 the soul has 
 righteous- 
 
 and 
 wisdom, or 
 the reverse. 
 Righteous- 
 ness and 
 wisdom 
 (i.e. virtue) 
 
 rrjs aXXrj? apery? kou rcov evavrlcov, koll Srj kou yjsvxrjs 
 ev f) ravra eyylyverai, rrorepov bparov kou arrrbv 
 eival (paal ri avrcov rj irdvra dopara ; 
 
 0EAI. '2)(eb s bi> ovdev rovrcov ye bparov. 
 
 reply." dcpepprjveve possibly (like 
 aX\o39 supr.) imputes to these 
 philosophers a want of clearness 
 in expression. At all events, 
 on the points in question an 
 answer could only be obtained 
 from them by way of inference. 
 Cf., however, Legg. 2, 660 b : 
 
 as (tv Kar Atyvirrov d(p€pp.T]i>eveis, 
 
 where the word means to re- 
 port from a foreign country. 
 
 13. 8ikciio(tvi>t)s e|et kci\ fnapov- 
 
 cri'at] " The possession and pre- 
 sence of justice." See note on 
 Theset. 153 b : 17 S' eV tT) ^x'? 
 
 14. rcov evavricov] Sc. e£« ml 
 Tcapovala. The plural suggests 
 the conjecture that Plato wrote 
 Sikcuoowtjs e£ei kcu (^povrjcreus. 
 
 24. ^xedov — opaTov] Cf.Legg. 
 IO, 898 d. 
 
122 
 
 IIAATQNOS 
 
 are thus 
 admitted to 
 
 exist. And 
 the soul 
 and virtue 
 are invi- 
 sible. And 
 of these in- 
 visibles, 
 though 
 they may 
 assert that 
 the soul is 
 in a man- 
 ner bodily, 
 theycannot 
 maintain 
 that virtue 
 has a cor- 
 poreal 
 form. 
 
 HE. TV 8e ; tow TOiovTu>v fxwv acofxu tl Xeyovaiv ]>• 247. 
 
 0EAI. ToVTO OVK€TL KCLTO, TOLVTOL CLTTOKpiVOVTai 
 
 irav, uXXa tt]V fieu \j/V)(i]i> avri-jv 8oK€iP (T(f)lat aco/xa 
 
 5 Tl K€KTrj(70ai, (j)pOVrjCTLV 8e KOU TOUV uXXcOV tKfMJTOV 
 
 on/ r/po)Tr]Kas, aicryyvovTai to ToXfiav 77 fJLrjdeif tcov 
 ovTOiv avra bixoXoyelv rj ttolvt duai aco/xara dii(rx v ~ c 
 plteaOai. 
 
 aE. 2a0&)s" yap rjfuv, co Gecurr^re, fieXTiov? 
 
 oyeyovaaiv avdpes, hrei tovtcdv 068' av ev eiraLo-)(yv- 
 
 Ousv 61 ye avrcov airaproi re kou olvt6)(0ov€?, dXXa 
 
 1. Ti — i'o-^etv] Join t»i/ tui- 
 
 OVTUIV Tl. 
 
 3. Tovro ovKen] " They an- 
 swer this with a distinction, 
 saying that the soul appears 
 to them to have a bodily form 
 of some kind, but with regard 
 to wisdom and the other things 
 of which you ask, they have 
 not the face either to admit 
 that these have no being, or 
 any longer to insist that all 
 things are bodily." 
 
 4. ttjv jiiv ■*\rvxh v ] See De- 
 mocr. Fragmenta Physica (Mul- 
 lach), esp. § 3. The word 
 ivavra does not resume eppovr]- 
 aiv k.t.\., but the sentence 
 reverts to an independent con- 
 struction. Cf. supr. 243 a, and 
 note. 
 
 4. crco/na ti K€KTrjO-dai\ The 
 
 invisibility of the atoms of 
 Leucippus and Democritus is 
 no objection to these philo- 
 sophers being included here : 
 for these words imply the ex- 
 istence of an aopuTOv crw/xa. 
 
 6. to To~\fiav] The inf. has 
 the force of a noun. Cf. ovS" 
 ai> a> infra. 
 
 7. avTa] See note on airo, 
 supr. 245 a. 
 
 11. anapToi] By an accumu- 
 lation of similes not unusual 
 with him (see Theaet. 169 b, 
 Sciron and Antaeus), Plato in- 
 troduces an allusion to the army 
 of Cadmus rising from the dra- 
 gon's teeth, and also to the 
 first inhabitants of Attica, who, 
 like the Giants, sprang from 
 the ground. Cf. Rep. 3, 444 e, 
 Qoivikikov ti, and Soph. (Ed. Col. 
 
 1534, (TTTapTCOV O.TT dv8p5lV. 
 
 01 avTa>u anapTol icai avro- 
 xQoves] Plato has obviously 
 some men in his eye, probably 
 the same to whom he alludes 
 in Theaet. 155 e. If it is true 
 that Archelaus abandoned the 
 ideal principle of Anaxagoras, 
 and became a purely physical 
 philosopher, he is perhaps in- 
 cluded, as well as the contem- 
 porary followers of Democri- 
 tus. (See Introduction to These- 
 tetus, p. xxx sqq.) But there 
 appear to be some who, though 
 holding a material principle, 
 are thought capable of being 
 improved into the position 
 
20<M2TH2. 
 
 123 
 
 247* ^LCLTeivoivr av rrau, o /jlt) Bvvcltoi tolls X € P°~ l ijvp.7TL6- 
 
 {<ELV €L(TLl>, 0)9 apa TOVTO Ov8ei> TO TTCLpOLTTOLV IcTTLV. 
 
 0EAI. ^ythov ola 8loli>oovi>toll Aeyeis. 
 
 aE. UolAlv to'lvvv dvepcDTGO/uLev avTOvs' el yap tl 
 koli crpLLKpov iOeXovcTL T(hv ovTcov avyxoopelv dcrco- 5 
 d ploltov, itjapKel. to yap eiri re tovtols dpLa /cat eV 
 tKeivoLs oaa eyei awpta Ijv/Mpvt? yeyovo?, els o /3Ae- 
 7TOVT69 dpLfpoTepa elvai Xeyovai, tovto olvtols prrreov. 
 Ta^' ovv to~co9 av diropolev' d Se tl tolovtov irewov- 
 
 OaCTL, 0-K07T€L, 7TpOTeLVOpL€VCOV TjpLCOV, dp tOtAoLCV OLV io 
 
 8e)(€cr0aL /cat 6/ioAoyuv tolovS elvaL to ov. 
 
 which is assigned them in 
 what follows, who by dialec- 
 tical pressure can be brought 
 to substitute force for body. 
 Perhaps the " disciples of Pro- 
 tagoras," who said that "sen- 
 sation was knoAvledge," are thus 
 viewed as a more refined sort 
 of materialists. If so, the irony 
 with which, in the Theaetetus, 
 they are opposed to the unini- 
 tiate becomes manifest. Cer- 
 tainly the words, ttjv \eyopivqv 
 V7T aircjv akt)6eiav Kara afxiKpa 
 Siadpavovres iv rois \6yois yeveaiv 
 clvt ovcrias (pepop.evr]v riva npoa- 
 ayopevovatv, are an exact de- 
 scription of the " Megarian" 
 treatment of Protagoras in the 
 Tkeaetetus, and it may be that 
 the notion of making the men 
 better for the sake of argu- 
 ment is suggested by the deve- 
 lopment of the " sensational 
 idealism," which is attributed 
 to him in that dialogue. It 
 is equally possible, however, 
 that the argument is pointed 
 at a supposed inconsistency be- 
 tween the physical and ethical 
 
 writings of Democritus. See 
 the views on " the soul," 
 "justice," "wisdom," in De- 
 mocritus Fr. 1, 4, 5, 6, 35, 
 36, in, 127, 128, 129, 135 
 (Mullach's edition). 
 
 I. ttov 6 prj dvvarol — elcri] 
 
 For the " pendent" constr. of 
 
 7rai>, cf. SUpr. 219b: irav, onep 
 
 k.t.X. tov p.ev ayovra -noielv, to 
 
 8e dyopevov Troieio~8al 7rov(pdp.ev. 
 
 rats X e P ai o-vp.7ru£eip] The 
 description of the dpvrjToi in 
 Theset. 155 e is closely parallel, 
 
 01 ov8ev oAXo olopevoi elvai rj ov 
 av dvvcovTai dirplg to'lv %epo'iv 
 \a(3eo-8ai. Cf. Emped. 1. 356 : 
 
 fjpeTfpais rj X e P°~ l ^afaw' rjirep 
 re p.eyio~Tr) neidovs dvOpwiroicriv 
 dpatjiTos els (ppeva 7tlttt(i. 
 
 6. eiri re toiitois] Cf. Theset. 
 185 c, supr. 243 d, e. 
 
 7. £vp(pves yeyovbs] " Which 
 arises as a common nature." 
 
 10. irpoTeivopevav] The word 
 TTpoTelvea-dai in this sense ac- 
 quires a technical use in Aristo- 
 tle, cf. Topica, p. 164, b. 2 : eo-n 
 ydp, <os dnXas ehrelp, 6 BuiXckti- 
 kos 6 irpoTaTLKos <a\ eWrariKdV 
 
 We mip- 
 pose tin m 
 to make 
 this ad- 
 mission i 
 though it 
 is far more 
 than the 
 aboriginal 
 " Sons of 
 Earth" 
 would have 
 admitted. 
 We then 
 ask, If tli e 
 name ' ex- 
 istent' ap- 
 plies to 
 things both 
 visible and 
 invisible, 
 what is the 
 common 
 
 R 2 
 
124 
 
 IIAATONOS 
 
 nature 
 
 which is 
 thus pre- 
 dicated of 
 both ? 
 
 Lrst Hi' 
 
 shouldhave 
 
 to pause 
 for a reply, 
 
 we propose 
 to them the 
 following 
 definition 
 of Being : 
 ' All that 
 is by nature 
 capable 
 either of 
 doing or 
 suffering.' 
 Being is 
 potency, 
 
 0EAI. To irolov 8)] ; Ae'ye, /ecu rdya dcropeOa. p. 24; 
 
 HE. Ae'yO) 81) TO KCU blTOiaVOVV K(lKTY)\x£vOV Sv- 
 
 vapiv, e\r elf to iroLtiv erepov otlovv 7re(j)VK09, tur 
 
 ely TO TTClOeiv KOU apLKpOTOTOV V7TO TOV (fjavXoTCLTOV, C 
 5 KOLV €L flOVOV UaOLTTa^ 7TOLV TOVTO OVTOiS thai' TlOtpai 
 
 yap opov, bplfav to. optcc, w? ccttiv ovk aAAo tl ttXtjv 
 Svvapi?. 
 
 0Ei^I. 'AAA' €7reiiT€p olvtol ye ovk e'xpvaiv ip tco 
 irapovTL tovtov fieknov Xeyeiv, 8e^ovTai tovto. 
 [ ° SE. KaXco?' tcrcQS yap av elavaTepov rjp.lv re ko! 
 
 ('cttl 8e to TrpoTeLvetrdai, ev iroLelv 
 tci likeim (Set yap ev oXcos \r](p6r]vaL 
 npos b 6 Ao'yoy) to 8' ivio-TaaBai 
 to ev 7To\\d, r) yap avaipel rj 8i- 
 aipel. 
 
 2. Aeyco 8tj] " Well, here I 
 give it you." Ae'yw refers to 
 
 Aeye, and 8r) is used, 8eiKTiKcos, 
 
 as in Kal 8r). 
 
 3. etV' els to — (pavXaTaTOv] 
 
 " Either so as to affect another 
 thing, or to be affected by the 
 least thing in the most trifling 
 way." For this use of ttokIv, 
 whence the technical word noi- 
 t]tik6s in later Greek philo- 
 sophy, cf. Theset. 160 a. 
 
 5. k&v el povov elo-aim£\ As in 
 the production of an individual 
 sensation. Cf. Theset. 157 a. 
 
 TiBepai yap opov 8vvapis] 
 
 Badbam conjectures rldepai yap 
 
 opov cos hlcTTiv ovk aXKo tl ttXtjv 
 
 Bvvapis. Boeckh. conj. Spifav. 
 The construction of 6pl£eiv is 
 difficult. There is probably 
 an ellipse of 8e1v, cf. AeSewcrai 
 k.t.\. supr. 235 b. Mr. Grote, 
 in his criticism of this dialogue, 
 appears to think that Plato 
 intended to allow this defi- 
 nition to stand. But docs he 
 
 not attach more importance 
 than Plato does to wbat is only 
 a step, though an important 
 step, in the dialectical progress 
 of the argument 1 Observe the 
 words (247 e), 'lctcos yap av elav- 
 CTTepov rjp.lv re Ka\ tovtois eTepov 
 
 av cpaveir). For an application of 
 the same notion, cf. Phsedr. 
 
 270 d: a>8e Set Stai/oettr^at 7repi 
 otovovv (pvcreois, npcoTov pev, 
 
 airXovv r) iro\vei8es Icttlv eVetra 
 
 8e, iav pev arrhovv rj, cncoTvelv ttjv 
 8vvapiv avTov, rtVa 7rpos tl ire- 
 cpvKev els to 8pav e%ov rj Tiva els 
 to Tradelv vtto tuv. 
 
 6. cos eo-TLv\ Sc. to. ovra. 
 
 9. 8ex 0VTaL tovto] In a simi- 
 lar spirit, in Legg. 10, 900, 
 Clinias answers for the ob- 
 jectors. Compare also the ima- 
 ginary youth in the Phsedrus 
 (p. 243 e). 
 
 10. KaAws] " They say well." 
 Tbis refers to the modification 
 of their assent implied in eVet- 
 
 Trep awrot ovk e'xovcriv K.r.A. 
 
 icrcos yap av elo~vo~Tepov 
 
 (pavelrj] Cf. Legg. 7, 820 e : 
 
 Kelcrdco pevTOi KaBairep eveyypa 
 \\)CTLpa (K Trjs ciWrjs 7roAtTet'nf, 
 eav rj tovs devTas r)pas rj kiu tovs 
 
20<M2TH2. 
 
 125 
 
 247- TOVTOIS €T€pOl> OLV (f)OLl>eir]. TTpOS /JL€V OVU TOVTOV? 
 
 248. tovto rjiAiv tvTavOa jX€vIt(d ^vvopoXoyqQev. 
 0EAI. Mem. 
 
 HE. YIpos 8rj rovs ere'povs Xwfiev, rovs rwv el$a>v 
 (f)t\ovs' av 8 7}plv koli tol irapa tovtwv u(])eppyueve. 5 
 
 Befxevovs ifxas /^Sojucor <piko(ppo- 
 
 vrfrai. Rep. 4, 437 a. 
 
 4. tovs t£>v et'Scoi/ (fiikovs] 
 The word etSos indicates that 
 the men here spoken of are 
 Socratics, so far at least as 
 the allusion is personal at 
 all. Now they are certainly 
 not Cynics ^KvTivBeveioi m\ 
 01 ovras ciTraidevTOi), still less 
 
 Cyrenaics, with whom the only 
 " essence" was a succession of 
 momentary ndBrj. They are 
 Socratics under an Eleatic or 
 Pythagorean influence. Pro- 
 clus, indeed, (Comment, in 
 Parmen. p. 149) takes it for 
 granted that Plato here al- 
 ludes directly to the Pythago- 
 rean school, whom Aristotle 
 includes with the Platonists 
 amongst the advocates of a 
 " motionless essence," tu>v ras 
 
 ukivi']tovs ovaias XcyovrwP, Met. 
 
 XIV. 4, 1 09 1 b. But, besides 
 the word eldos, the dialectical 
 features and the way in which 
 yeveois is separated from ota-ia, 
 are inconsistent with this. 
 Four possible suppositions re- 
 main, if we believe the dia- 
 logues to be the work of 
 Plato. The "friends of forms" 
 are either (1) Megarians (since 
 Schleiermacher this has been 
 the most general impression) ; 
 or (2) Plato himself at an 
 earlier stage ; or (3) Pla- 
 tonists who have imperfectly 
 understood Plato. The fourth 
 
 hypothesis combines (2) and 
 (3). The theory of Socher, 
 who imagined the ' Sophist' to 
 be a Megarian critique of Plato, 
 would make the Megarians, in 
 contradiction to the little which 
 we know of them, to be the 
 advocates of hvva^is, Kivrjais and 
 yevccris. In favour of the first 
 hypothesis, according to which 
 the Megarian philosophers are 
 the el8a>v 0/\ot, it may be urged 
 that Plato, before writing these 
 dialogues, had stood in a rela- 
 tion of close intimacy with 
 Euclides and the Megarian 
 school, and that this passage is 
 a friendly criticism of views 
 with which he himself had at 
 one time strongly sympathized. 
 The name afios, expressing the 
 object of definition, was a 
 common inheritance of the So- 
 cratics, and the tendency of the 
 Megarians to rest in sharply 
 defined, incommunicable ab- 
 stractions, appears not only in 
 the Sophisms of Eubulides but 
 in the objection of Euclides to 
 comparison, of which, as Plato 
 hints in what follows, the An- 
 tisthenean rejection of predica- 
 tion and definition was but the 
 caricature. As Zeno refuted 
 motion by the movement of 
 thought, so they by dialectic 
 made logic impossible. But on 
 the other hand we have no 
 warrant apart from this pas- 
 sage for supposing that they 
 
 lorce, rc- 
 ceptivity, 
 in ;i word, 
 power. 
 Supposing 
 
 this to In; 
 
 ;iuc<jpltjil 
 for the 
 nonce, we 
 turn to the 
 lovers of 
 ideal forms. 
 
12(i 
 
 IIAATQNOS 
 
 STe distin- 
 
 i^ni-h in 
 
 your dia- 
 lectic be- 
 
 twccn la- 
 coming and 
 
 Being : 
 whereof, ye 
 say, we 
 have bo- 
 dily and 
 sensible 
 partici- 
 pation in 
 the former, 
 but mental 
 andratioci- 
 native par- 
 ticipation 
 with the 
 latter 
 alone, 
 which is 
 eternal, 
 whereas 
 Becoming 
 is transi- 
 tory and 
 
 BEAI. Taur earou. p. 248 
 
 aE. Yeveaiv, Tifv 8e ovalav ywp'i'i irov SieAofjLtvoi 
 Ae'yere ; rj yap ; 
 
 0EAI. Nat. 
 5 SE. Kgu acofxan p.tv 77/xa? yevecrei oY alaOrjaeois 
 KoivcDveiv, 81a Xoyicrpov 8e ^/v\rj Trpos ttjv ovtcds 
 ovalav, r)v del Kara ram a. GKravTCDS ^X eLl> a7 " e 5 7 e ~ 
 vkcnv 8e aXXore aAAcoy. b 
 
 0EAI. <f?ap,€i> yap ovv. 
 
 i° SE. To 06 67/ KOlV(£>VUV, CO iravrtov apiCTTOl, TL 
 
 departed so far from the Ele- 
 atics as to admit a plurality of 
 C1S77. Euclides said that Being, 
 or the Good, was one, though 
 called by many names. And se- 
 veral points in the description 
 are favourable to the view to 
 which we have seen reason 
 to incline, which differs but 
 slightly from those of Ueber- 
 Aveg and of Mr. Grote : that 
 Plato, while developing his 
 own theory of knowledge with 
 greater clearness, administers 
 a gentle reproof to some of 
 his own followers, who held 
 tenaciously to a conception of 
 the e"i8rj, based on immature 
 statements of his own, and 
 mixed with Eleatic and Pytha- 
 gorean elements. (See the In- 
 troduction to the ' Sophist.') 
 The points which make for this 
 conclusion are the following: 
 
 — vo-qra cirra not dcrmpaTa e'l8r] 
 (246 b) ; a-a/iari — SY alcrdi'jo-ems 
 
 Koivoivdv 8ia \oyi<Tjxov 8e y}n>xf] 
 
 7rp6i ty]v ovtcos ova-'iav — de) Kara 
 ravra coo-auras *X UV ( 2 4-8 b) ; 
 the WOl'ds a> ndvTCOV apiUTOi, 
 
 which might well be aimed at 
 friends and pupils by Plato (cf. 
 
 Theset. 148 b : "Apiara y dv6pa>- 
 7rcov, 6} 7rai8es) " and eytb 8e tcreuj 
 8ia crvvrjdeiav, supposing Plato to 
 
 speak here as if in his own per- 
 son : also fip.epu>Tepoi supra. 
 
 2. Teveaiv, ttjv 8e ovalav] Cf. 
 SUpr. 221 e : vcvo~tikov pepovs, 
 to 8e 7re£ov, and note. This 
 omission of pev, like many 
 other idioms which might ap- 
 pear to be of late growth, is 
 found already full-blown in 
 Homer. 
 
 5. u-wpaTi] Dat. of the in- 
 strument, answering to -fyvxfi in 
 what follows. 
 
 yeveaet] Dat. after KOiva- 
 
 vfiv, answering to npos — ovo-lav. 
 7. yeve&iv 8e] The end of the 
 sentence reverts to the begin- 
 ning, turning out the obverse 
 side of the chief statement, as 
 so often in Plato. 
 
 IO. To 8e 8r] KOivooveiv] The 
 introduction of this word, which 
 plays an important part in the 
 sequel, should be noticed, as 
 the emergence of a fresh ele- 
 ment in the evolution of the 
 thought. Cf. Gorg. 464 c. And 
 see Rep. 6, 490 b. 
 
2CXM2TH2. 
 
 vzi 
 
 248. tovO' v/jLcis eV dp.(f)oiv Xe'yeiv (pcopev ; dp ov to i/0i> 
 5t; Trap rjpcov prjOev ; 
 
 0EAI. TottoIov; 
 
 SE. YlaOrjpa ?; iro'irjpa e/c 8vvap.ea)9 twos oltto 
 twv irpos aXXrjXa ijvvwvTcov yiyvoptevov. Ta^ ow, 
 w QeaiTTjTe, avT&v ttjv Trpo? ravra airoKpicnv av piev 
 ov KaraKovei9, eyco 8e 'laws 8id avvrjOeiav. 
 
 0EAI. TtV ow 81) Xeyovai Xoyov ; 
 c iH'E. Ou orvyxfopovo-LV rjpuv to vvv 8rj pr/Oev irpbs 
 tovs yrjyeve'is overlap ire pi. 
 
 0EAI. To Trolov ; 
 
 aE. \kclvov eOepev bpov irov tcov ovtcov, otolv to) 
 iraprj rj tov irdcryeiv 77 8pav kou irpos to crpuKpoTaTOV 
 8vvapas ; 
 
 GEAI. Not. 
 
 SE. E[/)oy 5?) Tama To8e Xeyovaiv, otl yeviaet 
 ptev pi€T€o~TL tov irda\etv /cat iroitiv 8vvdpec£>s, irpos 
 8e ovalav tovtcov ov8eTtpov ttjv 8vvap.LV dppLOTTeiv 
 (pacriv. 
 
 I. eV a^Kpotv] Sc. yereffecos 
 
 (cat ovaias. 
 
 4. eK Suwi/xecos Ttfos yiyvo- 
 
 lievov] The account of sensation 
 in the Thesetetus belongs to the 
 line of thought which is here 
 indicated : only the " power" 
 is not there inferred from the 
 act — since agent and patient 
 are regarded as having no ex- 
 istence except in act. Theast. 
 157 a: °^ Te jup Koiovv earl rt 
 irp\v av tc3 iraax^vTi tjvveXdrj, ovre 
 ndcrxou, 7rp\v av rw tvoiovvti. 
 
 7. 8ca (rvvrjdeiav ] If the 
 
 Stranger is speaking in his 
 own person, these words may 
 naturally enough point to the 
 contemporary Eleatics, i. e. the 
 
 school of Megara. But if Pla- 
 tonists are meant, the author 
 must be supposed to speak 
 from behind the mask ; as 
 happens sometimes in the 
 Laws. Cf. Kep. 9, 583. 
 
 16. Cti yev. — (paaiv] "That Be- 
 coming has part in the power 
 of doing and suffering, but 
 that active and passive are qua- 
 lities whose force is wholly 
 inapplicable to being." The 
 meaning of Swa^eas here is 
 something between " power of 
 acting " and " the power that 
 is inherent in action." 
 
 18. rfjv 8vvap.1v] The word 
 appears to be used here in a 
 slightly different sense from 
 
 fall of 
 change. 
 Well, fair 
 sirs, but 
 what is thi 
 common 
 nature of 
 which ye 
 
 5 too apeak, 
 under the 
 name of 
 ' participa- 
 tion?' Shall 
 we explain 
 this by the 
 definition 
 which we 
 just now 
 gave to 
 your oppo- 
 nents, as 
 an active 
 or passive 
 energy- 
 arising 
 from some 
 power ? 
 
 j - The Stran- 
 ger's prac- 
 tised ear 
 discerns 
 that from 
 theirserene 
 height they 
 reply with 
 scorn. Be- 
 coming 
 may have 
 part in 
 agency and 
 passivity : 
 but such 
 language 
 is inappli- 
 cable to 
 Being. 
 
128 
 
 IIAATQNOS 
 
 Without 
 question- 
 ing the 
 propriety 
 of this, we 
 ask a fur- 
 ther ques- 
 tion : 
 
 ' Whether 
 the soul 
 knows, and 
 whether 
 Being is 
 known V 
 On their 
 assenting 
 to this, we 
 persevere : 
 ' Is there 
 agency, or 
 passivity, 
 or both, in 
 knowing, 
 or in being 
 known 1 ?' 
 They must 
 of course 
 say, 'Nei- 
 ther.' 
 They will, 
 however, 
 
 0EAI. Ovkovv Key ova l rt ; p. 248 
 
 HE. Ylph? o ye XtKTtov y/xiu otl oeopeOa Trap 
 avrwv en TTvOeaOat aa(j)eaTepoi>, ei 7rpoaopoXoyov(rL d 
 ttjv fxev \j/v)(i]i> yiyvaxjKeiv, ttjv o* ovaiav yiyvm- 
 5 (TKecrOou. 
 
 0EAI. <&ao-\ prjv tovto ye. 
 
 SE. Ti oY ; to yiyvtoo-Ktiv rj to yLyimcrK€0~6ai 
 
 (fia.T6 TTOirjpa i] iraOos rj apcjyorepov ; rj to peu ttol- 
 
 07] pa, to oe Odrepov ; ?} iravTamaaLV ovherepov ov- 
 
 Serepov tovtwv peTa\ap(3dv€ii> ; SrjAov coy ovSt'repou 
 
 ouderepov' Tavavrla yap av rcuy e\nrpoaQev Xeyoiev. 
 
 GEAI. Mav0dva>. 
 
 SE. To <5e d>9 to yiyvcoaKEiv eXirep eo~Tai iroteiv 
 
 bwdfieas immediately preced- 
 ing, and more akin to the 
 common one of " nature," "im- 
 port," " meaning." Cf. Rep. 
 6, 511 e. 
 
 8. rj d/KpoTepov] I. e. Are the 
 mind and the object of the 
 mind each at once active aud 
 passive in knowledge 1 
 
 Spinoza postulates the acti- 
 vity of mind, cf.Eth.II. Deff. 3. 
 Explic. : " Dico potius concep- 
 tum quam perceptionem, quia 
 perceptions nomen indicare 
 videtur mentem ab objecto 
 path At conceptus actionem 
 mentis exprimere videtur." 
 
 13. For to be, or to be ye (sc. 
 (palev av, cf. (flare — av — Xe'yoiev 
 
 supr.), cf. Legg. 3,676 c : dcf> ov 
 
 7ro\eis t elo~\ k.t.X., boKew civ irore 
 KaravoTjo-ai xpovov nXijdos oaov ye- 
 yovev ; Ovkovv pabiov ye ovbapais. 
 T6 8e ye,, <° s anXerdv re nai dprj- 
 Xavov av e'lrj. lb. I, 640 : t6 
 
 fikv yap — as 6p6bv ap^ovra 
 
 eivai, uavOdveis. lb. 5, 735- For 
 
 the continuation of the in- 
 
 direct form, cf. also Theret. 
 171 d: r) Kal ravrrj paXtora lara- 
 o~6ai [sc. (paipevj rbv Xoyov. 
 
 There is some difficulty 
 about the arrangement of the 
 speakers. Rejecting the read- 
 ing of Stephanus and Hein- 
 
 dorf, 6. brfXov — Xeyoiev. £?. 
 Mavddvoo robe ye, we have to 
 
 choose between that of the 
 Zurich editors, 3. bijXov — Ae- 
 
 yciev. 6. Mav6dva>. 3. To be 
 
 ye — (or to be), where the 
 Stranger answers his own ques- 
 tion, as in Legg. 10, 894 a : 
 
 tjvlk av t'l nddos fi • brjXuv <u? 
 
 k.tX, and that of Stallbaum, 
 
 G. AijXov — Xeyoiev. S. Mav8dvu>' 
 
 to be ye — , in which, before 
 proceeding further, he accepts 
 Thesetetus' report of the an- 
 swer of the elbebv cp!\oi. The 
 former is more in keeping 
 with Plato's later manner, and 
 makes the anacoluthon easier. 
 It has, therefore, been retained. 
 
 13. to yiyvwo-Keiv Trao-^eii/] 
 
 The distinction between the 
 
2CXM2TH2. 
 
 129 
 
 248. ti, to yiyvcoo-KopLevov dvayKalov av ijvpLfialveL ira- 
 e cryeLV. ttjv ovoriav hr) /caret tov Xoyov tovtov yiyvco- 
 
 crKopLevrjv vtto ttjs yvcocreco?, KatT oaov yiyvcoaKerai, 
 Kara toctovtov KLvelaOat Slol to irao-yew, o drj (fiapLtv 
 ovk av yeve'crOai irepl to ypepLodv. 
 
 GEAI. 'OpOm. 
 
 SE. T7 Se irpos Aioy ; chs dX^Ocos KLvqcrLV koll 
 farjv Kai ^rv\r)v koll (ppovrjcriv 1) paSlto? 7T€La0r)a6- 
 
 pLeOa Tffl 7T0LVTe\(OS OVTL pLT) TTOLptLVOLL, pLl]§6 {rjV CLVTO 
 
 249. pLr]8e (Ppovelv, dXXa, aepLvov koll dyLov, vovv ovk e^ov, 
 
 aKLVYjTOV CCTT09 eivOLL ', 
 
 0EAI. &uvov p.(vT av, co Ijeve, Xoyov avyyco- 
 polpLev. 
 
 SE. 'AAAa vovv pc€v e)(€LV, £tor)v 8e pLt], (pcopev ; 
 
 GEAI. KaiTrwss 
 
 HE. 'AAAa Tama \x\v dpLfpoTepa ivovT avTco 
 XeyopLev, 01) pLyv iv ^v\fj ye (pr/cropLev avTO eytLV 
 
 active and passive verb, which 
 probably appears here for the 
 first time in Western litera- 
 ture, is used to suggest that 
 knowledge is a movement or 
 process of some kind. Compare 
 the use made of the grammati- 
 cal distinction of ovopa and pqpa 
 below, p. 262, and of the singu- 
 lar and plural numbers above, 
 p. 238. 
 
 IO. aepvbv Kai ayiov\ There 
 is an allusion to the statues of 
 the gods. Cf. Phsedr. (of 
 paintings) : ecrr^Ke pev cos ££>vtci, 
 eav 8 avepr) ti, o~epv(bs iravv 
 
 aiya. Phileb. 24, 53 d. Tim. 30b. 
 These words are wrongly con- 
 nected by some interpreters 
 with vovv. (e. g. Hegel, Cousin.) 
 
 For the thought, compare a 
 striking passage in the Laws, 
 967 a-e, where it is said that 
 the deepest study of astro- 
 nomy, instead of encouraging 
 the notion of a blind neces- 
 sity, leads directly to the sup- 
 position of a celestial mind 
 or minds : viratTTeveTo to vvv 
 ovtcos dedoypevov, oaoi tjjs dicpi- 
 fteias qvtwv tjtttovto, onus pi'jTTOT 
 av ctyv)(a bvra ovtcos et? aKpl- 
 fteiav davpao-Tols \oyio-po7s av 
 ixpr]To, vovv pr) KeKTi]peva, where 
 
 the same result is reached 
 a posteriori which is here ap- 
 proached a priori. 
 
 11. elvai] "Exists," in the 
 emphatic sense. 
 
 make 
 
 tlii.s hypo- 
 thetical ad- 
 mission, 
 
 that, if to 
 know is 
 activity, to 
 lie known 
 
 5 must be 
 passivity. 
 In which 
 case.Being, 
 in so far as 
 it is the 
 object of 
 knowledge, 
 is passive, 
 and there- 
 fore in this 
 respect, is 
 not at rest, 
 but in mo- 
 tion. 
 And, the 
 instant we 
 touch on 
 this con- 
 
 r . ception, 
 there is 
 borne in 
 upon us 
 the convic- 
 tion that 
 Perfect 
 Being can- 
 not be in a 
 
130 
 
 IIAATONOS 
 
 state of 
 
 Ilirlv nega- 
 tive repose, 
 
 a sacred 
 form 
 without 
 thought, 
 or life, or 
 soul, or 
 motion. 
 For, as 
 there is no 
 thought 
 without a 
 soul, so 
 that which 
 has soul 
 cannot be 
 devoid of 
 motion. 
 Hence 
 motion is 
 insepara- 
 ble from 
 thought. 
 But, on the 
 other hand, 
 thought is 
 equally 
 impossible 
 without a 
 principle 
 of perma- 
 nence and 
 rest. 
 
 0EAI. Kou tlv av erepou eypi Tpbirov ; p. 249 
 
 S?E. 'AAA« Sfjra vovv ptev kcu <^coi]v kcu i\rvyr)V, 
 CLKivrjTov fxevroL to 7rapa.7rai>, eu\j/V)(ov bv, ecrTuvai ; 
 0EAI. Ylavra epoiye aXoya tolvt eivai (f)aiveTai. h 
 5 3*E. Kat to Kivovpevov oV; /cat KLwqtriv avyxcopr)- 
 
 T€OU CO? OVTOL. 
 
 0EAI. Urn 8 ov; 
 
 SE. &ivfi(3alv€i 6" ow, co QeaiTr]T€, aKivrjTcov re 
 ovtcov vovv prfic-vi irep\ p.r)8c-vo? elvac p.rj8ap.ov. 
 10 GEAI. KopLiSfj ptev ovv. 
 
 SE. Kat ixrjv eav av (pepopeva roll KivovpLeva 
 ttolvt eivai o-vy\copcop.ev, kcu tovtco tco Xoyco tcwtov 
 tovto €K tcov ovtcov itjaiprjcropLev. 
 
 GEAI. ILSy; 
 *5 2JE. To /cara Tama /cat tocravTcos /cat 7repl to 
 avTO 8ok€l croc x w /°^ crTaoreca? yevecrOai ttot av ; c 
 
 GEAI. OvSapm. 
 
 SE. Tt 6" ; avc-v tovtcov vovv KaOopa? bvTa rj 
 yevoptevov av /cat ottovovv ; 
 
 1. exoi] " In what other 
 way could Being hold them ] " 
 This sense of e^oi is deter- 
 mined by ex*iv preceding and 
 the accusatives following. 
 
 3. aKtvrjTov — ep^vxov ov] The 
 
 cogency of this argument is 
 best seen by comparing Phaedr. 
 245 c, Legg. 10, 895 b, c. 
 See also Arist. Eth. Nic. X. 8, 
 of the life of the gods : aXka 
 
 pr/P Ijjv ye iravres vneiXrjcpapev av- 
 tovs Kcu evepyelv cipa' ov yap 8r) 
 KaBevbeiv cocnrep tov '~Ev8vpicova. 
 
 Metaph. XI. 1072 b : kcu far) 8e 
 
 ye xmdpxei' rj yap vov evepyeia 
 5. o-vyxoiprjTeov ut ovra] There 
 
 appears to be a logical inver- 
 
 sion in reasoning from " Being 
 has motion" to " Motion has 
 Being." This, like many of 
 Plato's arguments, had the 
 Organon then existed, would 
 have taken a different form. 
 But his thoughts would have 
 been substantially the same. 
 
 8. 8' ovv] " It follows from 
 this, however." Thesetetus is 
 warned to face the consequence 
 of his admission : and this is 
 implied in the adversative 6V. 
 
 1 2. ravrov tovto] Sc. vovv. 
 
 15. To koto. TavTa] " Do you 
 think that permanent unity of 
 condition and mode and sub- 
 ject could ever arise without 
 stability?" 
 
20cM2TH2. 
 
 131 
 
 249- OEM. "HtacrTa. 
 
 aE. K.gu firju 7rpo? ye tovtov ttolvtL Xoyco [xaye- 
 Teoi>, by av eiriaT-qpL-qv ?) (fipovrjaiv ?) vovv dcfjavltcov 
 Icr^vpt^rjTaL irepl tlvos birrjovv. 
 
 0EAI. ?(p68paye. 
 
 £?E. Tw 8r] (f)L\ocr6(f)a) kou Tama fidXiara tl- 
 
 fxavTL Tracra, cos* eoiKev, avdyKrj did Tama fxrjre tcov 
 
 ev r) Ka\ ra 7roXXa eldrj Xeyomcov to irdv eaTtjKos 
 
 d d7roSe')(€cr0ai, tcov re av iravTayr) to bv klvovvtcov 
 
 fir)de to irapairav aKoveiv, dXXa KaTa tyjv tcov iral- 
 
 Hence the 
 philoso- 
 pher, with 
 whom 
 thought is 
 the highest 
 being, can 
 listen 
 10 wholly nei- 
 ther to the 
 
 i. "Hiao-ra] This was one 
 clear result of the argument of 
 the Thesetetus. Cf. also Crat. 
 440. 
 
 2. Trpos ye tovtov — paxereov, 
 
 os av] Cf. Theset. 265 e : tovto 
 
 (tovtov, Ast. CODJ.) fifj dnoSexa- 
 p.e6a, bs civ Ae'yi?. 
 
 3. bs av — lo-xvpl^rjTacl Not 
 
 merely because of the value of 
 thought and knowledge, but 
 because such a person stulti- 
 fies himself. This is implied 
 in the form of expression. 
 " He who putting knowledge 
 out of sight yet dogmatizes on 
 any point." See Theret. 161, 
 Euthyd. 286, alib. 
 
 a.<pavi(av] Cf. Theset. 151 
 d. d\rj6es dcpavicrai, Aristoph. 
 Nub. 972. 
 
 6. T<5 t)r) (piXoo-6(pco\ The 
 sentence is continued as if the 
 verbal notion in cpiKoo-6(pco had 
 been expressed. Cf. Theset. 
 1 68 b : dvTi (piXoaocpcov, picrovv- 
 Tas tovto to irpdypa. Legg. lO, 
 886 a : Oeoyovlav — yevopevo'i re 
 cos cop lXtj crav. 
 
 7. tlov ev r) Ka\ ra. 7roXXa eiSi; 
 
 Xeyovrcov] I. e. The older Elea- 
 tics, or their more recent fol- 
 lowers, the friends of ideas, 
 
 who have just been described. 
 
 I O. KaTa ttjv tcov ivaibcov evxTjv] 
 
 This has been variously inter- 
 preted. Heindorf, following 
 Schleiermacher : " Secundum 
 votum puerorum, ut immobilia 
 moveantur, optantium." Stall- 
 baum : " Videtur respici ad lu- 
 sum quendam puerorum in 
 quo ludentes dicebant, 00-a uki- 
 vrjTa, Kai KeKivrjpeva e'irj." But 
 the words oo~a KeKivrjpeva 
 
 would then be too abruptly 
 introduced. Steinhart, in a 
 note to Miiller's German 
 translation of Plato, suggests 
 a new reading : dX\a kutu tt)v 
 tcov iraibcov eixrjv, ^vvapcporepa 
 Xeyeiv to ov Te Kal to ttclv, ko\ oaa 
 aKivrjra Kal KeKivrjpeva. The pas- 
 Sage admits of being so inter- 
 preted, by laying an emphasis 
 on gwapcpoTepa, without any 
 change in the order of the 
 words. " When asked whether 
 Being or the All is at rest or 
 in motion, we must say, like 
 children in their wishes, 'Both.'" 
 We may suppose an allusion 
 either to the vagueness and 
 impossibility of the desires of 
 children, who " cry for the 
 moon" (for evx^'j in this sense, 
 
 S 2 
 
!:;.<> 
 
 nAATQNOS 
 
 ■■■ 
 
 of O -I ■ 
 
 of motion 
 Init must 
 s;ts with 
 the chil- 
 dren, that 
 " both are 
 best," when 
 lie is de- 
 fining the 
 nature of 
 Being. 
 
 But he 
 cannot rest 
 there. 
 
 8cov ev^v oara aKivTjTa kul K(Kiv7]//.eva to bv re kul p. 249 
 to irav ^vvufx(j)OT€pa Xeyeiv. 
 
 0EAI. Wi-jOeo-TCLTa. 
 
 HE. T7 ovv; dp ovk eVriet/cwsr rj%] ^aiv6p.e6a 7T€- 
 5 pi€i.\i](J)ei>ai Tcp Xoyco to bv; 
 
 0EAI. Haw p.ev ovv. 
 
 HE. Bafiai ptevT \av\ apa, (0 QeatTrjTt, coV p.01 
 SoKovptev vvv auTov yvcoaeaOai nepi ttjv anropiav 777? 
 o-Keyj/eoos. e 
 
 10 0EAI. Ylcos av koll t'l tovt elprjKas; 
 
 HE. 'O pLCLKGCpie, OVK iwOUS OTL VVV €0~pL€V €V 
 
 ayvoia tyj nXe'ccrTr} irep\ avTOv, (pa.Lv6pt.e6a 8e tl Ae- 
 yuv rjpuv avTo'is ; 
 
 0EAI. 'E/MOi yovv' oirrj 5' av XeXr/Oapiev ovtcos 
 15 e'xpvTes, oi) Travv ^vvbqpu. 
 
 cf. Rep. 5, 540 d : p) ™XV 5oK ff 
 ehai 6 \6yos) : or perhaps to 
 some common form of expres- 
 sion in which they desired all 
 things in the universe, move- 
 able and immoveable, — or, it 
 may be, " sacred and pro- 
 fane," KivTjTa Kill dia.vT]Ta, what 
 may and what may not be 
 touched or stirred. 
 
 2. Xeyeiv] Bodl. Xeyei. 
 
 7. Ba/3al fjievr Tav'f apa\ av 
 
 here is probably corrupt : pev- 
 Tot, which some object to, is 
 quite in point. The only way 
 in which to make anything of 
 av would be to take it, by a 
 rather bold hyperbaton, with 
 the future infinitive : which is 
 out of the question. And it 
 is better to reject av than to 
 read, as Stallbaum suggests, 
 
 fxevT av apa. 
 
 Badham conjectures BaftaL- 
 
 ov uevrapa co QeairrjTe' cos uoi 
 8okovu€V vvv avrov yevrjaeadai 
 7rep\ ttjv dnopiav rrjs o-Ke^ecos. 
 But for j3aj3al — cos 8oKovp,ev, cf. 
 Rep. 2, 361 d, /3«/3ai — co <£. TX., 
 
 coy eppcopevcos k.t.A. I propose 
 
 merely to omit av, which has 
 probably crept in front supra a, 
 Aeivov pevr av, and render, "Ah 
 me ! on the contrary, Thesetetus, 
 how I fear that Ave shall only 
 now begin to know the diffi- 
 culty of the question about 
 Being." 
 
 IO. IIcos av Ka\ tl tovt e"pr]Kas] 
 
 The form of this question 
 determines the punctuation of 
 the more frequent form, 7ro>s « 
 tovt etwes ' } not 7rcos ; tl tovt 
 elnes ; 
 
 14. 'Eciot yovv] Sc. (paivofxedd 
 ti Xeyet)/. 
 
 ovtcos exovres] Sc. iv dyvoia 
 tji Tr\ei(TTr) ovres. 
 
20MFTH2. 
 
 133 
 
 p. 249. HE. 2K07T€i 8j] aacpe'crTepov, el Tama vvv £vv- 
 0. 250. opioXoyovvTes SiKalcti? av eirepa>Tr)6elpev direp clvtol 
 totc rjpciiTco/xeu rovs Xeyovras eivai to ttolv Oepfxbv 
 kou ^v\pov. 
 
 0EAI. Ilcua ; VTropvrjcrov p.e. 
 
 HE. Yldvv pev ovv kou 7re1pa.aop.al ye Spav 
 tovto epcoTcov ae KaOdirep eKelvov? Tore, Iva ap.a ti 
 kou 7rpotcop.ev. 
 
 0EAI. 'Op0m. 
 
 HE. JLlev 8r), Kivqaiv kou o~Tacriv dp ovk ivav- 
 TicoTaTa Xeyeis dAXrjAois ; 
 
 0EAI. ITwy yap ov ; 
 
 HE. Kou p,r)i> eivai ye 6/xotW (f)f)S dp.<p6repa avrd 
 kou eKouepov ; 
 b 0EAI. <&r)pl yap ovv. 
 
 HE. ' Apa KivelaOai Xeycov apt^orepa kou eKare- 
 pov, orav eivai avy\wpfj9; 
 
 0EAI. O^apy; 
 
 HE. 'AAA' ecrrdvat arjpaiveis, Xeycov avrd dp.(po- 
 Tepa eivai; 
 
 0EAI. Keuwm; 
 
 HE. Tplrov apa ti irapa Tama to ov ev ttj ^rv\fj 
 
 Far tl.i-, 
 definition 
 i- open t'i 
 
 question 
 
 with which 
 we assailed 
 the dualists 
 in our pre- 
 vious argu- 
 ment. 
 Motionand 
 rest are 
 opposites. 
 Yet both 
 are, and 
 have part 
 in Being. 
 
 Being, 
 however, 
 is distinct 
 from both. 
 
 15 For when 
 we say, 
 'Both are,'' 
 we do not 
 mean that 
 both are in 
 motion, or 
 that both 
 are at rest. 
 Hence 
 
 20 Being em- 
 braces 
 both, and 
 both par- 
 take of 
 
 1. EKoVet — \|/-vYpoV] " Con- 
 sider then more completely 
 whether in accepting this con- 
 clusion we do not now deserve 
 to be troubled with the ques- 
 tion which we ourselves asked 
 of those who said that the 
 Universe was Heat and Cold." 
 
 6. bpav tovto] Sc. vTTOfxvri- 
 crai ere. 
 
 7. tots] Supr. 243 e : tL to 
 eivai tovto vno\di3cop.ev vpav ; 
 
 TTOTepOP TpiTOV K.T.X. 
 
 Iva apa ti na\ irpoicopev ] 
 "That, while I recal this to 
 your memory, we may advance 
 a step in the argument." Cf. 
 Rep. I, 346 a : Ka\, w paxapie, 
 p.T] napa 86£av aTroicpivov, Iva ti 
 Kal nepalvcopev, 
 
 19. XXX' eo-Tavai] For this 
 use of dX\a, cf. Rep. 2, 382 e : 
 
 dXXa 8(81035 tovs e\6poiis ijfev- 
 
 8oito ; 
 
 22. iv 777 faxd] Cf. Rep. 
 
 6, 484 C : prj8ev evapyes ev 
 
134 
 
 IIAATQN02 
 
 Being. But 
 Being is 
 different 
 from them 
 both, and, 
 in virtue of 
 her own 
 nature, 
 neither 
 rests nor 
 moves. 
 
 T10€LS, COS" V7T €K€ll>OV T11V T€ <JTU.(JIV KOU T7]V KLVr)0~LV p. 250. I 
 TT€pL€\0/J.ei>-)]l> (TvXXa(3u)l/, KOU UTTlScOV UVTCOU 7TpO? TT)V 
 
 ttjs ovaius KOLVtoviav, ovtoos tivou Trpoareiire'i dfi(f)6- 
 repa ; 
 5 GEAI. Ku>Svi>evopL€i> coy aArjOco? rplrov dirojxav- c 
 reveaOai ri to ov, otolv klvyjo-lv kou ardaiv dvai 
 Xeycofieu. 
 
 HE. Ovk dpa KLvr)cris kou ardor is iarl £vvap.§o- 
 repov to ov, aAA' krepov 8rj tl tovtcov. 
 w 6EAI. "Eoikcv. 
 
 SE. Kara tt)v clvtov (f)vcnv dpa to ov ovre earr]- 
 
 K€V 0VT6 KlVeiTtU. 
 
 0EAI. 2 X 6 ^. 
 
 3E. Hot Br) XPV T W Bidvoiav en rphruv rov 
 
 rfj yjsv)(rj e\0VTes Trapdheiypa. 
 Theset. 155 ^ • Tavra br), oipai 
 6poXoyr)para Tpla pdxerai iv rjj 
 rjperepa ^i/*??. 
 
 I. ok in ineivov tt)v re crrd- 
 criv Ka\ tt)v Kivrjaiv Trept.e)(op6vr]v 
 crvWaPow] By deleting the 
 comma after Trepiexopevrjv the 
 syntax is improved ; and the 
 inverted order of the words is 
 in keeping with the style of 
 the dialogue. "So then you 
 conceived of Being as a third 
 and distinct kind, under which, 
 as embraced by it, you com- 
 prehended motion and rest, and 
 fixing your attention on their 
 common participation in Being, 
 you thus applied the term 'ex- 
 istent' to them both." 
 
 5. dnopavTevcaBaij I. e. This 
 
 truth of reflection is implied 
 in language. Compare Rep. 
 
 6, 505 e ". b drj SicoKei irava ^v^r) 
 dnop.avTevop.tvri rt eivai. 
 
 8. Ouk apa — tovtwv] " Being, 
 
 then, is not motion and rest 
 taken together, but is distinct 
 from these." 
 
 II. Kara — Kivelrai] In the 
 spirit of the Parmenides it is 
 shewn that Being, which has 
 just been said to include rest 
 and motion, in its own nature 
 neither rests nor moves. For 
 the position of ovk, which is 
 emphatic, cf. Theaet. 161 a : 
 as ovk aii i'xei ovrco ravra. 
 
 The search for Being seems 
 here to be relinquished as 
 hopeless. The thread of argu- 
 ment is not dropt, however ; 
 for it is this absolute sever- 
 ance of Being from rest and 
 motion, after seeming to in- 
 clude them, which suggests 
 the fresh inquiry concerning 
 the nature of difference or 
 negation. 
 
20M2TH2. 13.' 
 
 250. /3oi>Ao/xei>oi> ivapyes tl 7Tfpl avTov nap eavTco /3e- ^T^ 1 * 
 37E. Oifiat fiev ovSafioae kri pahiov. el yap tl 
 
 BaLwaaaOai ; «""" 
 
 ' 7 fchatathing 
 
 9EAI. Uol yap ; wl,id ' '» 
 
 not at rest 
 is not in 
 motion, or 
 
 fir} Kiveirai, ttcos ov\ eo~Tr)Kev; y to pr)8a/j.Lo? iarross ™ ce ver8& - 
 
 d 7TCO? OVK av KlVeiTai ; TO Se OV TjfMV VVV e'/CTOy TOVTCOV therefore, 
 
 - \ we ma y 
 
 d/j,(PoTe'poov avoir etyavTai. rj SvvaTov ovv tovto ; take note 
 
 0EAI. UdvTCDV fiei> OVV dSwaTCOTaTOV . have found 
 
 ,__, rr\'$ ' /i~ **' » v ' the defini- 
 
 AE. Tooe tolvvv fivqadrivaL oiKaiov eiri tovtol?. tion of 
 
 T N „ Being not 
 
 0EAI. \.0 7TOLOV; iolessdiffi- 
 
 Wl? r /r| x v > zj/ v ... cult than 
 
 Aii. yJTL tov fir) ovtos ep(£>TY]6evTe9 rovvofia e(p that of 
 
 r, , 5, « , / / ' /) ' ' Not-Being. 
 
 o ri 7rore oet (pepeLV, iracrr) o-vveo~ypp.eva airopia, whence 
 
 z we derive 
 
 fJL€/JLV7)0-aL ; a sort of 
 
 /2*"C A T TT" v * despairing 
 
 WJiiAl. Uw? ya/) oy; hope, that 
 
 ^"C n/r" ? » »\ ' ' ~ » \ > / iY a ray of 
 
 Aii<. Mcoj> ow ez/ eAaTTOvi tlvl vvv ecrpev airopia. 15 fight u least 
 
 - _ \ % »/ on the one 
 
 e TTepi TO OV, perplexity, 
 
 GEAI. 'E/xoi /xeV, w £eVe, el SvvaTov elirelv, ev l^Ysoiu" 
 
 HE. ToOro /xeV tolvvv evTavOa KelaOco dLrjTroprj- ^ome t^The 
 fxevov eVetS?) 8e e£ tcrov to re ov /cat to fit) ov airo- "^f^to 
 
 I. ivapyes tl] Cf. Zvapym, this, but the following remark, 
 supr. p. 242 c. for which this prepares the way. 
 
 Trap eavrai] Cf. Theost. 1 46 I 2. o-ni/eo-^o/xe^a ajropi'a] Supr. 
 
 e : Xafielv 'iKavcos nap' e/xaur<5, 237—239. Cf. Theset. 1 65 b, iv 
 
 and note. cppeari crwex6u.evos, where the 
 
 7. dvanecpavTai] " Has risen metaphor is more distinctly 
 
 up before us." Cf. Theoet. kept in view. 
 155b: arret ttoV eVrt Tavra ra 18. cpaivofieQa] For the el- 
 
 (pdo-pLaTa iv Tjj T/fierepa ^vxjj. lipse, cf. Theset. 172 c: Ovkovv 
 
 Supr. 231 b : iv t<o vvv Xoycp o-^oX?;i' ayofiev, a> 2d>KpciTes. 2. 
 
 -irapcKpavevTi. Meno 85 d : dva- &aivop,e6a. 
 KeKivrjvTai al boi-ai avrai. 1 9. §ir)noprip.£vov\ "A diffi- 
 
 II. "On tov firj Svtos] These culty clearly stated." The 
 words are in construction with word occurs in Plato in this 
 fiepvrjo-ai. The thing which is technical sense only in the 
 "worth taking note of" is not Sophist, Politicus, and Laws. 
 
1536 
 
 IIAATQN02 
 
 steer the 
 
 li.-nL of ..in 
 discourse 
 
 between 
 this Scylla 
 and that 
 Chary bdia 
 
 with as 
 little dis- 
 grace as 
 may be. 
 
 pia? /j.€TeiArj(f)aTOv, vuv k\ir\<i rj8i], ko.6' direp av p. 1'p 
 aurcov Odrepov tire dpLvSporepov e'/re (ra(j)e<jT€pou 
 aua(f)aivr}TOU } koll Odrepov ovtcos dvacpalvecrOai' kou 
 lav av ixrjbdTepov iSeiv 8vva>p.€@a, tov yovv Xoyov, p. 251. 
 5 07rr]7rep av 6101 re cofiev eimpeirlcrTaTa, Sioicro/JLeOa 
 OVTC09 d/uL(f)ow dfia. 
 
 2. eire djAvdpoTfpov e'lre cra- 
 
 (peo-Tepov'] The latter is chiefly 
 meant, but the former is in- 
 troduced in accordance with 
 Plato's wish to omit no aspect 
 of a case. Cf. Rep. 1, 339 b: 
 
 ovrra> 8ij\ov old' el peydXrj. 
 
 5. diacropeda] " We shall 
 fend off our argument from 
 both :" " Steer clear of them," 
 as between Scylla and Cha- 
 rybdis, or the Symplegades. 
 (Cf. Horn. Od. 12, 219: (ktos 
 eepye vrja.) Compare the use 
 of bia>6eiodai in Herodotus 
 and in Democr. Fr. Ethic. 
 
 20 : kol ovk oXlyas Krjpas ev rco 
 /3tw Siaxreai, (pBovov Ka\ £/?Xoz> (cat 
 dvapfULTjv. The construction, 
 however, is different here, and 
 has driven the editors to con- 
 jecture — Heindorf Siootjoneda, 
 Stallbaum bia<ra>cr6pe6a, C. F. 
 Hermann 8ia6t]cr6peda. Of these 
 Stallbaum's correction is the 
 best, although not agreeing 
 well with evTrpenea-Tara. But 
 the construction may be de- 
 fended, if we take the words 
 to mean literally " We shall 
 push our argument (vessel) 
 through between them both 
 (or, so as to avoid both at 
 once) with such appearance as 
 we may." The genitive dpcpoiv 
 is then governed by the 81a in 
 composition. Cf. Polyb. 22. 
 IX, 17 : 8ia>6. rat craplo-aas 8ia 
 Twv rp-qpdrav. 
 
 Badham defends the text on 
 slightly different grounds. His 
 note deserves insertion here : 
 "Juxta difficile esse ostendit, id 
 quod est atque id quod non est 
 explicare. Hinc auguratur, si 
 quid lucis utrivis horum ali- 
 cunde accedat, fore etiam ut 
 alteram discerni possit : sin 
 arnbo in tenebris maneant, 
 quid turn ] Disputationem, 
 servabimus, dispo?ie?nus, per- 
 sequemur ? Imo, ita repelle- 
 mus, ut si quis ex ejus quod 
 non est natura negotium nobis 
 facessit, eundem in eo quod 
 est baud minus sibi contradi- 
 centem efficianius. Accedit 
 quod cum hoc verbo et hac 
 sententia evTrpeireo-TaTa egregie 
 convenit, at non cum con- 
 traria notione, quae conjecturis 
 supra commemoratis inest : 
 parum enim hospitem Eleati- 
 cum Sophistis infensum dece- 
 ret speciosam disputationem 
 promittere." It may be enough 
 in order to defend our interpre- 
 tation from this last objection 
 to refer the student to Theae- 
 tetus 196 e, where the con- 
 fession of shamelessness is 
 immediately followed by an 
 avowal of the determination 
 to continue the argument, and 
 to infr. 254 d, supr. 241 d, 
 especially the word (3iaCeo-dat. 
 The unattainableness of a per- 
 fectlyj " reasoned" method is 
 
20M2TH2. 
 
 IS7 
 
 ). 251 
 
 9EAI. K«Ac3y. 
 
 £*E. Aeycopev 8r) kclO* ov tlvcl irore rpoirov iroX- 
 Xols bvopacrL tclvtov tovto eKaarore Trpoaayopevopev. 
 
 0EAI. Qilov 87) tl\ TrapdSeiy/jLa elire. 
 
 SE. Ae'yo/JL€i> avdpaiirov 8r) ttov 7roAA' clttcl eVo- j 
 i'o/nd{pi>T€s, tcl re -)(p(Dpara iiriXpepovTts clvtco kcll to. 
 a^rjpara kcll /xeyeOi] kcll /ca/c/ay kcll apeTas, ev oiy 
 b ivacn kcll irepoL? fivploi? ov povov avOpwirov clvtov 
 dvaL (pape'v, dXXa kcll dyaOov kcll erepa a7reipa, kcll 
 rclkXa 8r) Kara tov clvtov Xoyov ovtoo? ev 6kclcttov 
 
 II. b. 3. 
 
 1 •■. ; 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 . ■ 
 
 mean l>y 
 giving 
 
 many 
 names to 
 one thing : 
 as white, 
 tall, good, 
 bad, to 
 man : 
 whereby 
 we afford 
 excellent 
 diversion 
 , to the wits 
 of youth, 
 
 continually rising up before 
 Plato. 
 
 2. ttoWoIs ovopacri raliTou 
 tovto'] This recals the saying 
 of Euclides, that the good was 
 ev, 7roXXoTs ovopacri KaXovpevov, 
 and in so far confirms the 
 impression that the Megarians 
 have been under criticism in 
 what precedes. In this and 
 other expressions they had 
 perhaps implied a "commu- 
 nion" of unity with variety, 
 which was inconsistent with 
 their logical principles. Com- 
 pare also the saying quoted 
 in Republic 6, 505 c, probably 
 from the same source, that 
 to ayaObv is cppovrjo-is dyaBov, 
 whose authors failed in their 
 attempt to isolate the concep- 
 tion of good. 
 
 We are now introduced to a 
 new sort of philosophers, who 
 serve (like the Si/cr^pei? of the 
 Philebus) to reduce those just 
 mentioned to the point of ab- 
 surdity, and by a crucial in- 
 stance to bring the question 
 to a clear issue. They are the 
 same who are ridiculed in the 
 
 Euthydemus, and amongst 
 them Antisthenes is most pro- 
 bably included, whether or 
 not the word oyjnpadeo-i and 
 the phrase vno nevias r. t. (p. 
 kt. are meant to convey a co- 
 vert allusion to him. The 
 passage certainly reads like 
 personal satire. Compare Phi- 
 lebus, pp. 13, 14, where a dif- 
 ferent aspect of the same "child- 
 ish puzzle" is described, and 
 contrasted with the dialectical 
 One and Many ; as also in 
 Parm. 129 c,d. See also Phileb. 
 37 c. Cognate difficulties re- 
 specting Predication are noticed 
 by Aristotle, Phys. I. 2, § 15: 
 
 01 pev to ecrTiv acpel\ov, ao-jrep 
 AvKo(pp(oV ol he tt)v Xegiv peTep- 
 pvdpi^ov, oti 6 avBpamos ov \ev- 
 kos eo~Tiv, dXka \e\evKCOTat,' — iva 
 prj — 7roXXa elvai notcbo-i to ev. 
 For eo-rrovhanocnv infra, cf. supr. 
 216 b : t5>v nepl Tas e'pihas 
 eo-rrovhaKOTcov. 
 
 3. tovto ] I. e. " Anything 
 which happens to be in ques- 
 tion." Cf. Thea?t. 199 a: p) 
 yap e^eiv T h v (TfiaTTjprjv tovtov 
 
 alov re, and note. 
 
138 
 
 IIAATQN02 
 
 and of oer- 
 
 fiin an- 
 
 (ii-iit t \ rns. 
 w ho, from 
 their po- 
 verty in 
 
 the having 
 of wisdom, 
 take pride 
 in crying 
 out upon 
 ns that we 
 have made 
 the one 
 many and 
 the many 
 one. They 
 will allow 
 us to say 
 that good 
 is good, and 
 man is man: 
 but not 
 that man 
 is good. 
 Such are 
 the refine- 
 ments on 
 which they 
 spend a be- 
 lated en- 
 thusiasm. 
 To omit no 
 aspect of 
 thought on 
 the subject 
 of Being, 
 we address 
 to these, as 
 well as to 
 the rest, 
 the follow- 
 ing ques- 
 tion : 
 Shall we 
 conceive 
 
 v7ro0e/jL€i>oi irdXiv avrb TroXXa koll iroXXols ovofiacri p. 251 
 Xeyoptei/. 
 
 0EAI. 'AAt?^ Aeye«. 
 
 SE. 'QQev ye, olfiai, tols re veois koll twv yepov- 
 $t<ov T0I9 6\j/L/JLadeai Qoivqv irapeo-KevaKapLev evOv? 
 yap avTikafiecrOai ttolvti irpoyeipov a>s dhvvaTOV ra 
 re iroXXtx ev koll to ev noXXd elvai, koll 8rj ttov \aL- 
 povtJLv ovk ewvres dyadov Xeyeiv dvOpanrov, dXXa to 
 fxev ayaOov ayaOov, tov 8e avOpcoirov dvOpcoTrov. c 
 10 evTvyyaveLS yap, (6 QealrrjTe, coy eycp/xat, 7roAAa/a9 
 to. roLavTa ecnrovSaKoaiv, evloTe 7rpeafivT€pOLS- dv- 
 0pa>7TOL9, /cat i>7To irevias Trjs 7repl (ppovrjaLv KTTjaeCOS 1 
 tol roiavTa TeOavpLaKOCTL, /cat Srj tl /cat 7rdao-o(pov 
 olofievoLs tout avTO dvevpr/Kevai. 
 15 0EAI. Ilaj>i> fiev ovv. 
 
 SE. '\va to'lvvv irpos diravTas rjfXLv 6 Xoyo? fj 
 tov? 7rco7roTe 7repi ovala? koll otlovv 8taXe\6evTa?, 
 eaTco /cat 7rpb? tovtovs /cat irpbs tovs aXXov?, oaoL? d 
 epirpoaQev 8LeLXey/j.e0a, Ta vvv d>? ev epcoTrjaei XeyOrj- 
 loabfxeva. 
 
 GEAI. Ta 7rota drj ; 
 
 SE. HoTepov firjTe ttjv ovalav KLvqcrei /cat o~Tao~et 
 irpoadTTTa>p.ev firjTe aXXo aAAco p,rj8ev p,r)8evL, dXX 
 
 12. nevlas — KTrjcrean'] Geni- 
 tive of respect : " Poverty in 
 respect of the possession of 
 knowledge." The tautology has 
 been objected to, but might 
 be paralleled from many pas- 
 sages in these dialogues. Some 
 passages in the Memorabilia 
 and Symposium of Xenophon 
 make it probable that these 
 words contain a personal allu- 
 sion to Antisthenes. 
 
 r»7? nepl ttjv (ppovrjcriv kttj- 
 crecos] Cf. Polit. 28 1 e: ttjs 
 nepl ra dpfpuapara yevicreass. 
 
 13. iru(T(TO(pov olopevois] Cf. 
 Phsedo 90 C : o'iovrai <jo<pa>rarot 
 yeyovevat re kcu KaravevorjKiPat 
 povoi OTi ovre tS)P Trpaypdrcov 
 ovdevos ovdev vyies ovre ra>v 
 \6ya>v. 
 
 1 8. earroo] Sc. Xeyopeva, from 
 ra — \ex6r)0~6peva infra. 
 
2CXM2TH2. 
 
 139 
 
 351. a>s a/JLiKTa ovtol Koii dfivvarov peraXapfidveLv dXXij- 
 
 Xcov ovrcos aura ev rots Trap r\\uv Xoyois riOcopev ; 
 
 77 Trdvra els ravrov fjvvdyoopev cos* Sward eTriKOivco- 
 
 vetv dXXrjXois ; ?; ra pev, ra oe pr) ; Tovrwv, co 
 
 e Qealrrjre, rl iror av avrovs irpoaipelcrOaL (prjaaipev ; 5 
 
 0EAI. 'Eyw pev virep avrwv ovSev eyco irpos 
 ravra airoKplvaaOai. rl ovv ov KaO' ev diroKpivo- 
 pevos e'0' eKaarov ra ijvpfialvovra eaKexj/co ; 
 
 aE. KaAcoy Xeyeis, /cat ri6a>pev ye avrovs Xe'yetv, 
 el (3ouAeL, Trpcorov prjdevl prjSev prjoeplav Svvapiv 10 
 eyeiv KOivoovlas els prjbev. ovkovv kIvt)cfIs re /cat 
 ardais ovdapfj peOeijerov ovalas ; 
 252. 0EAI. Ov yap ovv. 
 
 SE. Tt cV ; earai irorepov avrcov ova las pr/ 
 7rpoo~KOLva>vovv ; 15 
 
 0EAI. Qvk earai. 
 
 HE. Tayy Sr) ravrrj ye rfj avvopoXoyla Trdvra 
 
 I. a/MiKTa ovra Kai abvvarov 
 (sc. bv) p,erdKapfidveiv dXXjjXcoi'] 
 The sentence changes to the 
 impersonal form. dovi/aTov Bodl. 
 AIL Cett. ddivara. 
 
 6. 'Eyco pev — KaXcos Xf-yeij] 
 ' 'Persons sic distribuendse : 'E-yco 
 jxev — diroKp'ivaaOai : Tt ovv — e'crse- 
 •fya : KaXaJs \eyeis : Kai riB&piv 
 
 y avrovs k.t.X. Hie, ut ubique, 
 respondentis partes Theoeteto 
 tribuuntur : sed fraud em fecit 
 librariis initium sermonis koi 
 ridco/jLev ye, qui abruptior illis 
 visus est, non animadvertenti- 
 bus Hospitis verba ex iis quae 
 supra dixerat continuari." Bad- 
 ham. Perhaps : but ko\ nda- 
 fiev ye k.t.X. seems too abrupt in 
 the rejoinder, and in point of 
 fact it is the Stranger who now 
 proceeds to "give each answer 
 
 in succession. 
 
 7. 7-t ovv ov] " Suppose you 
 say Yes to each alternative in 
 turn, and see what follows in 
 each several case." 
 
 10. pydevl] Governed by koi- 
 vaviaSi 
 
 1 1 . eis firfievl " For any re- 
 sult." 
 
 1 4. earai irorepov avrS>v] " Can 
 either of them be, without par- 
 ticipating in Being 1 " 
 
 17. Ta X v8}i] Compare Theset. 
 183 a, where the assertion of 
 absolute relativity is similarly 
 reduced to nothingness (to 8 y 
 cos e'oiKev, e(pavt], el Trdvra Kivelrai. 
 irdo-a dnoKpio-is, nepl orov av tis 
 aTVOKpivrjrai, Sfiolcos dpdrj eivai, 
 ovra r e\eiv (pdvat Ka\ /at) ovrco), 
 
 and ibid. 161 e. 
 
 Trdvra dvdarara yeyovev] 
 
 ol I;. in 
 Motion, 
 
 Kest, and 
 
 .•ill other 
 bhij] 
 
 muni 
 
 c;il)le witli 
 
 each o1 hter I 
 
 Or shall wo 
 bring all 
 into com- 
 munion 
 indiscrimi- 
 nately? Or, 
 thirdly, 
 shall we 
 say that 
 some have, 
 and others 
 have not, 
 commu- 
 nion ? 
 
 If we adopt 
 the first 
 hypothesis, 
 Motion and 
 Rest are 
 non-exist- 
 ent, for 
 they have 
 no commu- 
 nion with 
 Beinor 
 
140 
 
 IIAATQNOS 
 
 Thus havoc 
 is made .-it 
 once of all 
 bhephiloso- 
 phieswhich 
 attribute 
 Being to 
 Motion, or 
 to Rest, 
 « bether as 
 One or 
 Many. 
 
 And all 
 theories 
 of compo- 
 sition or 
 division, 
 whether 
 into an in- 
 finite or a 
 fixed num- 
 ber of ele- 
 mental 
 forms, whe- 
 ther the 
 union and 
 partition 
 are con- 
 ceived as 
 alternating 
 or as ever 
 going on 
 together, 
 are equally 
 
 avaarara yeyovev, a>? eotKev, apa re tcov to irav p. 252 
 
 KLVOVVTCOV KCLL TCOV to? eV LaTCCVTCOV KOU OCTOL KOLT elSi] 
 
 to. ovtcl Kara raura diaavTcos eypvTa eivai (f)acriv aet' 
 irdvTes yap ovtol to ye eivai irpoadirTovaiv, 01 pev 
 5 ovtlos KiveiaQai XeyovTes, oi 8e ovtcos eo~TX]K0Ta 
 eivai. 
 
 0EAI. KopiSjj pev ovv. 
 
 SE. Kat prjv Kai oaoi tote pev ^vvTiOeaai to. h 
 ttccvto, tot€ 8e Siaipovcriv, ehe eis ev kou ifj evo9 
 lodireipa e'vre eh irepas eyovTa GTOiyeia hiaipovpevoi 
 kou e\ tovtcov crvvTiOevTes, bpoltos pev edv ev pepei 
 tovto TiOcoai yiyvopevov, bpoicos 8e Kai eav del, KaTa 
 irdvTa Tama Xeyoiev dv ovde'v, ehrep prjdepla ecrTi 
 &ppi£is. 
 15 0EAI. y O P 0m. 
 
 HE. "Et£ Toivvv dv auTol iravTcov KaTayeXaaTO- 
 TaTa peTLOiev tov Xoyov oi prjdev ecovTes Koivcovia 
 7ra8rjpaT0$ eWepov OaTepov irpocrayopeveiv. 
 
 " All theories are hopelessly 
 unsettled," or " swept away." 
 " The ground is cut away 
 from all." 
 
 1. apa T€ t5>v\ Qu. an le- 
 gend, rd ? 
 
 2. bs ev i(TTavTCiv\ Sc. to 
 ttuv. 
 
 Kar ei'617] " In several ab- 
 stract forms." 
 
 8. Kai iitjv] This sentence 
 refers Avholly to Empedocles 
 (cf. ev pepei) and Heraclitus (cf. 
 dei), as Heindorf justly ob- 
 serves, unless some of the 
 earlier Ionians (e. g. Anaxime- 
 nes) are included in the words 
 f'| ivos cineipa. 
 
 12. Kara navra Tavra] These 
 words resume the preceding 
 
 clauses eure — crvvTi.6evTes, opolcos 
 — dei. " In all or any of these 
 modes their theory is nothing 
 worth." 
 
 16. "En toivvv] Cf. Euthyd. 
 
 303 d : Kai rdSe av erepov dijpo- 
 tlkov ti Kai ivpqov ev toIs Xdyots" 
 onoTav CprjTe prjre KaXov eivai prj- 
 8ev prjTe aya86v npdypa prjre k.t.X. 
 — t<b ovti ^vppdnreTe to. OTopaTa 
 
 twv dvdpamcov oti he oi povov 
 
 to. tcov ciXXav, d\Xd — Kai rd vpe- 
 Tepa avTco k.t.\. 
 
 aiToT] The very men who 
 deny predication, with Avhom 
 we are now conversing, and on 
 Avhose hypothesis the present 
 argument is built. 
 
 17. 01 prjdev ea>VTes\ " Who 
 forbid us to call anything, be- 
 
20M2TH2. 
 
 141 
 
 252. 0EAI. n«y; 
 
 c SE. T&> re etVcu irov irepi irdvra a.vayKo£pvTcu 
 
 XPwOaL KCU TU> Xddpis KCU TCp aXXcOV KCU T(p KOtO' 
 
 avTO kcu uvplois {repots, (hv a.Kpare'i? ovre? eipytaOai 
 kcu firj avvanrreiv eV toI? Xoyoi? ovk aXXcou deovrai 5 
 7W e^eXeytjovTcois, dXXa to Xeyofieuov oiKoOev tov 
 iroXejiLov kcu ivavTLCdaouevov e\ovTts, evrbs virofyOey- 
 yopLtvov wcnrep tov oltottov Ei)jOi>/cAea, irepKpepovres 
 del TTopevovrcu. 
 
 undone, ii 
 all combi- 
 nation is 
 denied. 
 
 But the 
 most com- 
 plete dis- 
 comfiture 
 attends the 
 enemies of 
 predication 
 themselves. 
 For they 
 cannot help 
 applying to 
 the subject 
 of their 
 
 cause partaking of some affec- 
 tion from another thing, by 
 the name of that other." koiv. 
 ira6. (t. = koiv. tov nda^eiv i(p' 
 er. Cf. SUpr. 245 a : 7rd#os tov 
 ivos i'xfiv. 
 
 (18.) hepov is governed by na- 
 BrjiMiTos. Similar language occurs 
 in the passage of the Philebus 
 already cited, p. 13 a : on 7rpo- 
 crayopeveis avra, dvopoia ovto, 
 eTepw, cprjaopev, ovopaTi. 
 
 2. T<5 re ehai 7rov] Cf. Theast. 
 157 b, 196 e, 202 a. 
 
 3. ciWav] Qu. an legend. 
 
 d'Wrj'Kcov 1 
 
 4. hv aKpciTels ovres etpyeoSai 
 kcu pr) o-vvciTTTeiv ev to'is Xdyots'] 
 
 hv is governed by etpyeo-dai, but 
 probably also connected by at- 
 traction with dicpaTels. avv- 
 cmTeiv is used absolutely. " So 
 that having no power to re- 
 frain from such expressions, or 
 to banish connexion from their 
 discourse." 
 
 6. dXXd to Xeyopevov] " But 
 they always carry about their 
 enemy, who haunts them, as 
 the saying is, in their own 
 house, and like the wondrous 
 Eurycles, has a voice within 
 them which mocks every syl- 
 lable they utter." Compare 
 
 Cratyl. 428 c, where the ac- 
 count of self-deception is like 
 that of self-contradiction here : 
 
 orav yap prj8e apucpbv dnocrTaTf] 
 aXX del 7rapfj 6 i^aTtari-jO'oiv, ttg>s 
 ov h)eivov ; Cf. also Gorg. 482 
 b : ov croi 6po\oyrjo-fL KoXKiicKtjs, 
 &> KaXhiicKeis, dXXd 8iaCpcovrjO-ei ev 
 anavTi ra /3i'co. 
 
 8. tov ciTO-nov Eipu/cXea] (See 
 
 Aristoph. Vesp. 10 14.) Eury- 
 cles was a ventriloquist pro- 
 phet. This passage seems to 
 imply that he made his voice 
 sound as if from within the 
 person consulting him ; and 
 this is also suggested by the 
 Scholiast's absurd gloss on 
 
 cltottov '. Tov prj edpaiov dXX' 
 del €KToni£ovTa Xeyet. The story 
 
 told by the Scholiast, that Eu- 
 rycles suffered from having 
 given an offensive response to 
 some one, is probably a mis- 
 taken attempt to explain the 
 connexion between a>o-irep — 
 
 Evpv/cXea and ohodev tov iro\e- 
 
 piov. The meaning of course' 
 is that they have their enemy 
 and their opponent in their 
 own breast, in the shape of a 
 voice, which comes from within 
 them, like the answer of Eury- 
 cles, who used to speak in those 
 
142 
 
 IIAATQN02 
 
 disoourae 
 Buob words 
 
 :is " is," 
 
 '• apart," 
 " from 
 others," 
 " by itself," 
 and have 
 thus an 
 adversary 
 within, 
 who saves 
 our labour 
 by convict- 
 ing them 
 of self-con- 
 tradiction 
 out of 
 their own 
 mouths. 
 But if all 
 things are 
 allowed to 
 have com- 
 munion, 
 Motion will 
 rest and 
 Rest will 
 move. 
 The third 
 case alone 
 remains : 
 that some 
 things 
 enter into 
 combina- 
 tion, and 
 some do 
 not. 
 
 0EAI. Ko/judf) Xe'yei? optoiov re /cat aXrjOes. p. 252 
 
 aJL. TV <5', av rravra dXXijXoi? eu>p.ev Svvapiv 
 eyeiv e7riKoivcovla? ; 
 
 0EAI. Tovto pev 0109 re Kuyco SiaXveiv. 
 5 HE. U&s; 
 
 0EAI. Ort Kivqais re avrrj iravrairaaLV icttcut 
 av /cat araais 1 av iraXiv avrrj klvolto, elrrep e7riyiyvoi~ 
 aOr/v eV aXXr/Xoiv. 
 
 EE. 'AAAa p.rjv tovto ye rrov reus peyiarai? 
 to avayKais ddvvarov, KLvrjatv re \o~Tau6ai /cat crraaiv 
 KLveiaOai. 
 
 0EAI. Xlcos yap ov ; 
 aE. To rpirov 8r) povov Xonrov. 
 0EAI. Nat. 
 15 SE. Kat prjv ev ye tl tovtcov dvayKalov, r) rravra e 
 77 pj)bev rj ra p.ev e'OeXeiv, ra. 8e pr) o-vpplyvvaOai. 
 0EAI. TIco? yap ov ; 
 HE. Kat p,rjv ra ye 8vo ddvvarov evpeOrj. 
 0EAI. Nat. 
 20 37E. rias* apa 6 /3ovXop.evo? 6p6a>s airoKpivecrOai 
 to Xonrov tcov rpicov drjaeL. 
 0EAI. KopuSr) pev ovv. 
 HE. Ore Sr/ ra pev eOeXei tovto Spav, ra 5' ov, 
 
 who came to him. Cf. Rep. 7, 
 
 52 1 b : otKeto? av Kal evbov 6 
 toiovtos 7rdXe/ior avrovs re oXXvai 
 Kal tt]v ciW-qv Ttokiv. 
 
 I. ofxoiov re kci\ akrjdis] "Most 
 
 true, your image is a very just 
 one." Cf. Rep. 8, 579 d : Uav- 
 
 raivacTiv, e<pr), SfioioTard re Kal 
 aXrjdearaTa Ae'yety. 
 
 7. eniyiyvoi<r6riv eV] itnpi- 
 
 yvoladijv eV, YS, Hence Bad- 
 
 ham COnj. e7ripiyvv<r6r]v. But cf. 
 Phileb. 37 c: dog?] p.ev hnyiyve- 
 a6ov \j/ev8os re Kal dX^des. 
 
 9. reus fiey'iarais avdynais ] 
 For the plur., compare Rep. 5, 
 458 d: epoiTiKals avayKais; and 
 for the whole expression, Tim. 
 87 d : ov koXov oXov to £<oov — 
 d^vfiperpov yap Tals /xeyicrrrus' 
 £vpp,€Tplais. 
 
20cM2TH2. 
 
 143 
 
 ^^Z- crye8bv olov ra ypaptpara TreirovOoT av eh], koll yap 
 eKeivcov to. pev dvappoarel irov irpbs dXXrjXa, rd 8e 
 ^vvappbrrei. 
 
 GEAI. FT^ 8' ov; 
 
 SE. Ta 8e ye (ficovrjevTa 8ia(f)ep6vTu>s row dXXwv 
 olov 8ecrp.b? 8id iravrcov KeycoprjKeu, ware dvev Tivbs 
 avrcov dSvvarov dp/jLOTTeiv kou tcdv aXXcov erepov 
 ere pep. 
 
 GEAI. Kal pdXa ye. 
 
 2?E. Has ovv ol8ev biroia ottoiol? Sward kolvcd- 
 veiv, 77 Teyvrjs 8ei tcd p.eXXovTi 8pdv iKavco? avra ; 
 
 GEAI. Te X v V ?. 
 
 SE. Ylolas ; 
 
 GEAI. T77? ypap/iaTiKr}?. 
 
 dE?E. Tt 8e ; wepl tovs tcov ofjecov /ecu fiapeoov 
 b (fyObyyovs dp ov X ovrcos ; 6 p.ev tovs avyKepavvv- 
 
 . I ust a of 
 1 1,. I 
 
 of the al- 
 phabet 
 some can 
 and others 
 cannot be 
 combined, 
 
 5 and the 
 same is 
 true of mu- 
 sical notes. 
 It is also 
 to he ob- 
 served, 
 that the 
 vowels are 
 distin- 
 guished by 
 the power 
 which they 
 have of 
 entering 
 into every 
 combina- 
 tion, and 
 being 
 
 jc indispen- 
 sable to all. 
 And as 
 none but 
 
 I. o-yeSov olov ra ypdupara] 
 
 The example of letters is 
 used to symbolize the nature 
 of the ideas, as in Thea?t. 202 e 
 (where it is shewn that the 
 simple is known before the 
 complex). Polit. 277, 278 (il- 
 lustration of the argument 
 from example). Rep. 3, 402 
 (education in uovo-ikti). Phileb. 
 18 (science determining the 
 infinite). In the Theastetus 
 and Philebus the parallel il- 
 lustration from musical notes 
 is also adduced, as here. 
 
 5. Ta fie' ye (pwvrjevra olov 
 
 8eo-fi6s] In this the vowels 
 symbolize the highest ideas, or 
 categories, Being, Identity, and 
 Difference. Compare Theset. 
 197 d : in the image of the 
 aviary, evias fie uovas 8ia ttoktcov 
 07177 av tvx^o-l neroaevas — where 
 
 the same thing is intimated, 
 and equally without explana- 
 tion. 
 
 7. apuorreiv] Neuter verb. 
 
 10. lias ovv oldev] Compare 
 Crat. 388 d : nas fie reKTcov rj 6 
 ttjv re^vrjv eya>p ; 
 
 11. 8pav Ikovcos aira] This 
 
 expression has no distinct an- 
 tecedent. But cf. Theast. 207 
 d (in a similar connexion), 
 dpcovras avrd, and note. The 
 conjectural emendation, 6po>, 
 is therefore not absolutely re- 
 quired ; though, if such were 
 the true reading, it may easily 
 have been corrupted froni 8pav 
 supr. 252 e. 
 
 10. 6 — rexvrjv e'xcov yiyvao~Keiv\ 
 " Who has the art of discern- 
 ing." For the inf., cf. Thea?t. 
 169 a : <ov 8?) av TTtpt ah lav 
 eveiy 8ia(ptpa.v. 
 
144 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 tli* 14 r.i 111- 
 
 liianau can 
 t.ll which 
 letters, and 
 none but 
 the musi- 
 cian which 
 notes, may 
 or may not 
 be com- 
 bined, so 
 none but 
 the dialec- 
 tician can 
 tell what 
 combina- 
 tions of 
 ideas are 
 possible. 
 
 fievovs re Kai ixi] TtyyY)v eywv yiyvcoaKeiv povaiKO?, p« 253 
 6 8e /lit) tjvvtii? d/xovaos ; 
 
 0EAI. Ovtcos. 
 
 SE. Rat Kara tcou aXXcou 87] reyycov koli are- 
 S^yiwv ToiavTa evpi]aop.ev erepa. 
 
 GEAL n^y <5' ov; 
 
 HE. TV <5' ; e7rei8r) kou to, yevr) 7rpo? dXXrjXa 
 Kara ravrd fxlijecos eyeiv w/uoAoy?)/ca/xe^, dp ov peer 
 emaTiyxrjs rivhs avayKaiov 8id rwv Xoyu>v iropev- 
 10 ea6aL rov 6p9w9 pteXXovra 8ei^etv iroia iroiois avpL- 
 (ficovel twv yevcov kou iroia aXXi]Xa ov Several ; kou 
 8r) KOU SlOC TTOLVTWV €L awl^OVTa TGLVT earii;, atari, c 
 o-v/xpLiyvvcrOai 8vvard elvai ; kou ttolXlv ev tolls 8iou- 
 pecreaiu, el 81 oXcov erepa tyjs Sicupeaecos alria ; 
 15 0EAI. Tla>? yap ovk eiricrTy]pa]S 8el, kou a^e86v 
 ye 'lacos rrjs pteylar^s ; 
 
 4. rexv&v Kai dre)(via>v] "Arts 
 and defects of art" — which can 
 only be determined by refer- 
 ence to the standard of the 
 corresponding arts. 
 
 For the mode of expression, 
 which arises from Plato's love 
 of complete statement, Hein- 
 dorf well compares Legg. 2, 
 
 653 e : ovk e'xav aiadrjo-iv rS>v 
 iv rais Kivi)afai rd^aov oi8e dra- 
 £i<bv, ois 8r] pv6p.6s ovo/ta kcu 
 apfiovia. Cf. also infr. 262 c : 
 irpdfyv ovK airpa^Lav. 
 
 7. to. yevrj] The word yivos 
 is used instead of eldos in se- 
 veral places of these dialogues, 
 and also in the Parmenides, 
 Philebus, Timseus, and Laws. 
 This is one of several points in 
 which there appears a transi- 
 tion in these dialogues towards 
 the language of Aristotle. See 
 
 esp. Parm. 135 b : cos ttrri yevos 
 ti eKcio~TOV Kai ovoia airrj Ka6' av- 
 ttjv. Phileb. 1 2 e : yeWi p.Lv ecrn 
 trav eu, ra 8e peprj /c.r.X. It will 
 be observed that the word oc- 
 curs here at the opening of an 
 especially Platonic passage. 
 
 8. fi/^ewy] Gen. of respect. 
 Cf. Pep. 5, 456 d : trios e'x«s 
 
 86£r]s rov roiovhe nepi. Alib. 
 
 1 1. Kai 8r) — ehai] " And also 
 
 whether there are any kinds 
 which (like the vowels), being 
 all-pervading, bind together 
 these and make them capable 
 of intermixture." 
 
 1 2. ravra] Viz. ret ervpepcovovvra 
 rcov yevcov. 
 
 14. el 81 6\av — atria] Antici- 
 pating the darepov cpvats which 
 is presently discovered, 81a irdv- 
 rcov biek-qkvBv'iav, p. 255. 
 
2CXM2TH2. 
 
 I 1,0 
 
 253. S(E. Tlv ovu av vvv irpoatpovpLev, d> QealrrjTe, 
 Tavrr/v ; rj Trpbs Aib? eXa.dop.eu eis ttjv tcou eXev- 
 Oepcou epjreaovTeg e7r lo-rrjpyv, kcu KiuSvuevopeu ^77- 
 rovvres top o~o§io~Tr\v irporepov dvevpr)Kevai tov 
 (f)i\6o-o(Pov ; 
 
 0EAI. Um XeyeLs ; 
 d £?E. To Kara yevrj SiaipelaOai koll fxr/re tclvtov 
 elSo? erepov -qyrjaaadai pLrjre erepov ov ravrbv p.cov 
 ov Trj9 8ia\€KTiKrj? (f)rjcrop.ev 67ricrTr)p.r}? eivai ; 
 
 0EAI. Nat, (jyrjaopLev. 
 
 EE. Ovkovv o ye tovto Svvarb? $pav piav \heav 
 hia 7roXXa>v, eVoy eKacrrov Keipte'vov x a> p' L9 i ^olvtt] 81a- 
 TerapLevrjv LKavcos SLaiaddverai, kou ttoXXols erepas 
 aXXrjXcav virb puag e^oadev irepie)(op,evas, kcu p-iav av 
 Sl oXcov iroXXwv ev ev\ tjvvr]p.p.evr]v, kou noXXas 
 
 In search- 
 ing foT the 
 Sophi 
 
 have found 
 tlie philo- 
 sopher, the 
 " Freeman 
 w\ 1 the 
 
 5 truth 
 makes 
 free." For 
 dialectic 
 is hie pro- 
 vince, that 
 is, the art 
 by which 
 one form is 
 seen per- 
 
 10 vading a 
 scattered 
 multitude, 
 and many 
 distinct 
 forms as 
 contained 
 in one, and 
 again, one 
 
 j r form com- 
 bined from 
 
 2. Ttjv tSiv iXevdepcov] Al- 
 though the Stranger was not 
 present at the conversation of 
 yesterday, he is made to allude 
 to the description of the philo- 
 sophic life which Socrates had 
 then given. Theset. 172, sqq. 
 Such a failure of the dramatic 
 element could have no place 
 in the Charmides, Protagoras, 
 or Phsedrus, and is rather in 
 the manner of the Laws. 
 
 7. prjre ravrov eidos erepov — 
 
 ravrov] This closely corresponds 
 with the account of dialectic in 
 the Phsedrus, 265 d, e. 
 
 1 1. Ovkovv — eV i'<rraa-&u] "Then 
 surely he who can do this is 
 able clearly to perceive one 
 form pervading many indivi- 
 duals which lie apart, and many 
 forms distinct from one an- 
 other, comprehended from with- 
 out by one, and again, one form 
 
 pervading many such wholes, 
 and knit together in a single 
 unity, and many entirely sun- 
 dered and apart. And this is 
 to have the science of discern- 
 ing in each kind wherein things 
 admit of communion, and 
 wherein they do not." 
 
 piav I8eav dia 7roAX<Mj>] Com- 
 pare Phileb. 16 d, e ; Legg. 
 
 12, 965 C: ap ovu aKpi^earepa 
 crKe\|n? 6ea r av rvep\ brovovv 6ra>- 
 ovv yiyvoiro rj rb 7rpbs piav Ideav 
 i< ra>v iroKK&v kiu dvopoia>v 8wa- 
 rbv elvai (Shftveiv. 
 
 12. evbs eKaarov Keipevov X^P'r] 
 Cf. Tim. 83 c : koX to fiev koivov 
 bvofia wacri tovtois rj Tives rav 
 larpatv ttov -)(okov encavopaaav rj 
 Kai tis &V hwarbs els tvoWcl pev 
 Ka\ dvopoia PXe'neiv, opav §' ev 
 avrols ev yevos evbv d£iov eircovv- 
 plas ndo-i. Phajdr. 265. 
 
 15. 81 oXav 7roXXwv] These 
 
146 nAATQNOS 
 
 manyBuoh vcoph iravrr) hicopurpevas. tovto (V eaTiv, fj 7*6 p. 25I 
 
 '■ ll „ „ ' fc, V r, / 5J / V Q 
 
 forms, and Koivcovetv eKaara bvvarai /cat oirr) firj, 6La.Kpi.vuv koto. 
 several , , , 
 
 universal*, yevos eiritrTatroai. 
 
 b ^ the C\T? A T TT ' * ? 
 
 boundaries olhAl. ilavTcaracri pev ovv. 
 
 of defini- __, > a \ \ v n ' ^ \ N ' "\ \ 
 
 tion wholly 5 ArL.. AAAa p.i]v to ye otaAeKTiKov ovk aAAco 
 
 sundered ->/ < > ? n^ ~ /1 ~ v £ ' 
 
 from all ococrei?, co? eycppou, irA-qv tco Kavaptos re kou oiKaito? 
 
 This is the (j)lAo(TO(pOVVTL. 
 
 of the com- 0EAI. IleGc* yap av aAAco 8olr) tls ; 
 
 munion and 
 incommu- 
 
 nicableness 
 of kinds. 
 In this 
 sphere the 
 philoso- 
 pher is to 
 be sought 
 
 HE. Tov pev 8rj (pLA6cro(j)ov iv tolovtco tlvl tottco 
 
 10 kcu vvv kcu eireura avevpr/crop.ev, eav QjTcopev, Ibelv 
 p.ev yaAeirov evapyco? kcu tovtov, erepov prjv rpoirov ]}• 254. 
 r\ re tov crocpicrTov ^aAeiroTrj? i] Te tovtov. 
 BEAI. Ucd?; 
 
 shalTcome *^' '^ ^^ O-TroSLBpaCTKCOV eh TT]V TOV p.7) OVTOS 
 
 hCTKOTeivoTrjTa, Tptfifj TrpoaamTopLevos avrr/?, Sea to 
 CTKOTeivbv tov tottov KctTavorjcrou ^aAeTroy. rj yap ; 
 
 and, like 
 tkeSophist 
 he is not 
 easily dis- 
 
 wholes are the ideas just men- some doubt is implied in the 
 tioned, each of which extends words iav (■qrayp.iv. Cf. infr. b : 
 to many individuals. Many av en fiovXopivois rjulv fj. From 
 particulars are comprised in which it may perhaps be in- 
 one universal, and many such ferred that Plato deliberately 
 universals again unite in one. relinquished the task of writ- 
 
 (15.) iv ei/1] Sc. oka, or, abso- ing the Philosophus dialogue, 
 
 lutely, "in one." Cf. The?et. n. hepov prjv rponov] Sce'crfi* 
 
 I 57 a : 67r ' ivos, Legg- 4, 7 T 8 C : or yiyverai. 
 
 iv iv\ 7repiKaj36vTa oiov tivi Tima. ig. Tpi&fj~j rpiQrj ("knack," 
 
 6. Ka0apS)s] I.e. Without ad- "rule of thumb,") is several 
 
 mixture of unphilosophic ele- times opposed even more 
 
 ments; "one who has risen into strongly than ipireip'ia to 
 
 the region of pure thought." knowledge and art, and is 
 
 diKaias, i.e. neither dva£lo>s (Rep. pointedly applied in the Pha;- 
 
 5, 495) uor Trapav6pu>s (lb. 7, drus and Gorgias to the so- 
 
 538,9). For KaBapms, cf. Phaedo phistical rhetoric. Phasdr. 260 
 
 65 e, 67 a, b, 69 b. And for e : ovk eari Ttyyr), dXX' are- 
 
 ScKaias, cf. Phsedo 83 a: ol 81- x vos rpifiv- lb. 270 b. Gorg. 
 
 Kaicos (piXopadets. 463 b : ovk eort rexvi}, aW ip- 
 
 IO. Ka\ eTreiTa] Viz. In the neipia Kai Tpifii]. See also Phi- 
 
 " Philosopher," about the pro- lebus 55 e : ras ala6r)creis mra- 
 
 duction of which, however, peXerav ipneipla Kai tivi rpi[3jj, 
 
 
2CXM2TH2. 
 
 147 
 
 254- 6EAI. "Eoikcv. 
 
 SE. 'O 8e ye (piAoaocPos, rfj rov ovtos aei Sia 
 
 Xoyta/icov irpoaKeLjxevo^ Idea, 8ta to Xapurpov av tyjs 
 
 \(opa9 ovSapLQ)? ev7rerrj? 6(j)0r}vcu' roc yap ttjs tcdis 
 
 h ttoXXwv yjrv)(rjs ofifxara Kaprepelv irpos to Oelov d(f)o- , 
 
 pcofTa abvvara. 
 
 0EAI. Kal ravra el/co? ov\ yyrrov eKeivcov ovtoos 
 
 € X €IP. 
 
 SE. Ovkovv irep\ p.ev toutov Kal raya e7n<XKe\^o- 
 fieda aafpearepoif, au en fiovXop.evois tj[uv if ire pi he 
 rod aocpiarov irov SrjXov a>? ovk avereov, irpiv av 
 iKavais avrov OeaawfieOa. 
 
 rats tt]s <TTO)(a(TTU<ijs Trpoo-xpco- 
 fiivovs 8vi>d(ie<riv (which are 
 here opposed to the essential 
 elements of art). The word 
 probably retains in this place 
 something of the original sen- 
 suous meaning : the Sophist, 
 from frequent contact, knows 
 how to feel his way in the 
 dark cave in which he lurks. 
 And perhaps it is further 
 hinted that he is the true ma- 
 terialist who gropes by the 
 touch (rpt/3^ TTpoo-arrTopevos), 
 and is blind to the light of 
 heaven. 
 
 2. bid Xoyiu/xcoi'] "Through 
 reasoning." Opposed to rpi^fj. 
 Cf. supr. 248 a. 
 
 3. rrpoo-Keipevos] " Clinging 
 
 to." Cf. Kep. 6, 490 b : dXX' 
 
 ioi Kal ovk arret pfiXwoiTo ovb drro- 
 Xrjyoi tov epcoTOi k.t.X. lb. 511b: 
 iva ptXP 1 T °v avvTToderov irii ttjv 
 tov rravrbs dpxrjv Icov, a\j/dpevos 
 aiiTrjs, TrdXiv av e^opevos roc ikei- 
 vrjs ixoptvav k.t.X. 
 
 4. rd yap rrjs tCov 7roXXa>i'] 
 
 The image of the cave in the 
 Republic will occur to every 
 
 reader. Cf. esp. Eep. 7, 518: 
 
 biTTal Kal and birrcov yiyvovrai 
 iniTapd^eis (*? iiriyiyv. rap. ]) dp.- 
 fido-iv k.t.X. See also the re- 
 markable passage in the Laws, 
 
 IO, 897 dt prj roivvv e'£ ivavrias 
 oiov els rjXiov dnofikirrovTes, vvara 
 eV pear]p.(3piq. enayouevot, Troirjaco- 
 p.e8a ttjv aTTOKpio-iv, cos vovv ttots 
 8vt}to1s dppacriv d^f6p.evoi re Kal 
 yvcocrdp.evoi Ikovcos k.t.X. Com- 
 pare with the whole passage 
 Bacon, Advancement of Learn- 
 ing (Ellis and Spedding's edi- 
 tion), vol. iii. p. 286 : " Were it 
 not better for a man in a fair 
 room to set up one great light, 
 or branching candlestick of 
 bights, than to go about with a 
 small watch candle into every 
 corner ?" 
 
 9. Kal rdx] For Taxa = mox, 
 
 "presently," cf. Phil. 53c: Ta^a 
 
 S' — paXXov padr)0-6p.e8a TtpoiXBdv- 
 
 tos rov Xdyov : alib. The sub- 
 ject has been already proposed 
 by Socrates, and will be ex- 
 amined presently, as soon as 
 the Sophist and Statesman shall 
 have been defined. 
 
 cerned: bat 
 for adifli r- 
 
 ent reason. 
 The So- 
 phist lurka 
 amidst the 
 darkness of 
 Not- Being, 
 nf which he 
 knows the 
 trick. The 
 philoso- 
 pher clings 
 by the force 
 of reason to 
 the Form 
 of Being, 
 which is 
 dark only 
 with the 
 excess of 
 light, and 
 because of 
 the weak- 
 
 U 2 
 
148 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 11 CSS (if 
 
 mortal 
 vision. 
 Bui for fche 
 presenl we 
 
 IIIUSI |MT- 
 
 severe in 
 our effort 
 to find the 
 Sophist. 
 
 II. c. 
 
 Since we 
 are agreed 
 that some 
 kinds ad- 
 mit of com- 
 bination 
 and some i 
 do not, and 
 this in 
 various de- 
 grees, while 
 
 0EAI. KaAw9 etVey. p. 254 
 
 HE. "Or ovv 8r/ ra. ptv rjfxiv rwv yevcov eo/uoAo- 
 
 yyjrat KOivuiveiv edeXeii' dWrjAot.?, ra 8e fxrj, kou ra 
 
 I±<lV Itt oAiyov, ra 8' iiri 7roAAa, ra 8e kou 8ia c 
 
 hiravTOdv ov8eu KcoXveiu rols iraai K€Koivo)vr)Kevai, rb 
 
 8)] perd rovro j-yveiricnrwiieOa tw Aoyw Tfj8e ctko- 
 
 7TOVl>T€S, fXT) 7T€pl TTOLVTCtiV TU)V e\8wV , "iVOL fir) TOLpOLT- 
 
 rojpeda eV 7roA\oi?, aAAa rrpoeXopevoi tcov peyiartov 
 
 Xeyopevcov arret, irpcorov ptev iroia €Kaard iarLv t 
 
 o€7T€£Ta KOivtovias dWrjXcov irccs e^ei 8vvap.eco$, tva 
 
 2. "Or ovv a>jioK6yr]Tai\ Join 
 
 copoXoyrjraL rjpiv. 
 
 3. Kal to. pev — KeKoivcovrjKevai] 
 
 This was not distinctly said, 
 but was partly implied in what 
 was said of the vowels, supra, 
 253 a. 
 
 4. eV oXiyop] " To a small 
 extent." 
 
 £7tI 7J-0AX0] "Extending com- 
 munication to many things." 
 
 6. £ui/e7rtcr7rco/xe(9a ra Xoya)] 
 
 The ideas of Being, rest and 
 motion, which are now chosen 
 for examination, have been 
 suggested by the preceding 
 argument. 
 
 7. firj 7T€p\ TTO.VTCOV TCOV flSojJ/] 
 
 Cf. Spinoz. Eth. II. 1 : Transeo 
 jam ad explicanda quae ex Dei 
 sive entis seterni et infiniti 
 essentia necessario debuerunt 
 sequi : non quidem omnia (in- 
 fiuita enim infinitis modis ex 
 ipsa debere sequi &c). 
 
 tva pfj Taparrcopeda iv 7roX- 
 
 Xot?] A similar reason is ad- 
 duced for the use of the argu- 
 ment from Example in Polit. 
 
 278c: fj ^rvxr] tcl pev avrcov 
 
 afiff ye nrj tcov ovyKpdcrecov opdebs 
 8o£d£ei, peruridepeva be els tcis 
 
 tcov npayparcov paxpas Kai pfj 
 pa8ias avWafias ravra ravra nd- 
 Xiv dyvoel. The contrast in 
 the text, however, is not be- 
 tween the simplicity of ideas 
 and the complexity of facts, 
 but between the few great 
 ideas and the multiplicity of 
 lesser ones. 
 
 8. Trpoe\6pevot\ Cf. Parm. 
 
 I43 C : iav irpoe\cbpe6a avrcov 
 e'ire ftovXei rrjv oicrlav Kal to ere- 
 pov e'ire ttjv ovcrlav Kal to ev e'ire 
 to ev Kal to erepov. Phileb. 45 e, 
 52 e. 
 
 10. dwdpecos] Gen. of respect, 
 like pi^ecos supra. " How they 
 stand in respect of capacity of 
 intercommunion." 
 
 tva to re ov d7raAAaTTeii>] 
 
 "That, even if we cannot grasp 
 with perfect clearness the no- 
 tions of Being and Not-Being, 
 we may at least exhaust the 
 argument respecting them, in 
 so far as the method of the 
 present inquiry permits, and 
 try if in any way we can 
 force the point that Not-Being 
 is really Not-Being, and take 
 no harm." 
 
2CXM2TH2;. 
 
 149 
 
 254- T0 T€ bv kcu fir) ov el urj wdarj aacjjrjvela. 8vvdp.eOa 
 Xafitiv, dXX' ovv Xoyov ye evdeel? p.T]oev yiyvco\xeda 
 irepi clvtcov, Ka6' ocrov 6 rpoiros evSe^erai ttjs vvv 
 d aKetyeco?, edv dpa tjulv ny irapeiKaOr) to ay ov 
 Key ova lv cos eariv ovtcos /x>) ov d6 cools dirciX- 
 Xdrreiv. 
 
 0EAI. Ovkovv XPV- 
 
 HE. Meyiara urjv twv yevcov, a vvv 8r] difjuev, 
 to re ov ai)TO kcu aTacrLs kcu KLvrjais. 
 
 0EAI. UoXv ye. 
 
 aE. Kal ut]v tco ye Svco (pauev avTolv d/juKTco 
 Trpos dXXrjXco. 
 
 0EAI. 2<p68pa ye. 
 
 57E. To 8e ye ov /juktov du(f)oiv ecrTov yap 
 
 aU(pCO 7TOV. 
 
 0EAI. Um 8' ov; 
 
 HE. Tpla 8rj ylyveTcu raura. 
 0EAI. Tlu^jv; 
 
 HE. Ovkovv clvtcov eKOtcrTOV toIv ptev 8volv erepov 
 ecrTiv, clvto 6° eavTco tolvtov. 
 e 0EAI. Ovrm. 
 
 IO ( 
 
 it may 
 be that 
 Borne enter 
 universally 
 into com- 
 munion 
 with all, let 
 us examino 
 the nature 
 of a few 
 selected 
 kinds, espe- 
 cially with 
 regard to 
 their power 
 of inter- 
 commu- 
 nion. 
 
 So we may 
 at least ex- 
 haust the 
 argument 
 about 
 Being and 
 Not-Being, 
 and per- 
 haps find 
 
 j - out a way 
 in which 
 Not-Being 
 may be 
 safely de- 
 clared to be 
 Not-Being. 
 Being, 
 Best, and 
 Motion are 
 
 20 the highest 
 kinds. Of 
 these, Rest 
 and Motion 
 are mutu- 
 
 2. 'Xafte'iv] " To grasp," — as 
 
 in Xafielv nap' ipavra, irapa aav- 
 tg>, &C. 
 
 3. ko.6' ocrov — aiifyews] Thus 
 even in the more exact of his 
 dialogues Plato ever complains 
 of an imperfect method. Cf. 
 Eep. 435 d, 506 e, 533 a, Phsedo 
 85 c, Tim. 29 b. 
 
 4. irapeiKadi]] Bodl. napei- 
 KaaOj). 
 
 8. a vvv S?) Sijj/iev] The ante- 
 cedent is found in the following 
 words. " The most important 
 kinds are those which we have 
 
 just been considering." 
 
 14. dpcpolv] Dative. " Being 
 has admixture with both." Cf. 
 ^^SS- 5> 733 d • rt,/ey °v v *<" 
 
 iTocroi fieri f3iot, Z>v nepi Set 7rpo- 
 eXopevov — Ibovra — ff/v u>s oiov 
 T ecrriv avdpeoTTOV paKapia>Tara j 
 
 Parm. 129 e : ra ei8?j, olov 
 6poLOTT]Ta re Kal dvopoiorrjTa Kal 
 TrXijdos Kal to ev, Kal errdenv Kal 
 Kivrjcriv. 
 
 19. Ovkovv — tovtov^ Compare 
 the very similar manipulation 
 of ideas in Theeet. p. 185. 
 
150 
 
 TIAATONOI 
 
 ally incom- 
 municable, 
 whileBeing 
 communi- 
 cates with 
 them both. 
 Thus there 
 come to be 
 three. And 
 each is the 
 same with 
 itself, but 
 other than 
 the remain- 
 ing two. 
 We have 
 thus men- 
 tioned two 
 more kinds, 
 unless 
 Same or 
 Other can 
 be identi- 
 fied with 
 Being, or 
 Motion, or 
 Rest. 
 But Same 
 and Other 
 are predi- 
 cable both 
 of Rest and 
 
 SE. Tl 7TOT aV VVV OVTCD? €Lp7)Ka/l€V TO T€ TUVTOl> p. %tfa 
 
 kgu 6a.T€pov ; iroTepa 8vo yevrj tlvI aVTGO, TCOV jllv 
 rpiwv aAAco, ^vfifxiyvvpevoi prjv iicelvois e£ dudyKT)? 
 dei, kcu irep\ irtvTe a A A' ov 7repl rpicov coy ovrcov 
 5 avTcau (TKe7rT€oi>, 7) to re tuvtov tovto koll Odrepov 
 coy (iKtivcov tl irpocrayopevovTes \av6dvop.ev rjfJLas p. 25^ 
 avTOv? ; 
 
 0EAI. "Ia-co?. 
 
 SE. 'AAA' ov tl fiyv KLvrjcri? ye K<xi aTacris ov6' 
 10 eTepov ovt€ tclvtov icrTi. 
 
 0EAI. Flcoy; 
 
 SE. 'O tl irep av kolvyj 7rpoo-eL7rcofiei/ Kivr)o~LV kcu 
 o-tolctlV) tovto ovdeTepov avroZv olov re dvaL. 
 
 0EAI. T*&j; 
 15 HE. Y^ivijais re crr?;crerai koll o-Tacri? av KLvrjOr}- 
 crtTaL. 7repl yap dpL(poTepa OaTepou cmoTepovovv 
 
 1 . Ti 7tot av — Bdrepov] Com- 
 pare the emergence of the ideas 
 of acpobpa, rjpepa and rroaov, and 
 their relation to each other, 
 occasioned by the simple words 
 Ka\ acpodpa ye, in Phileb. 24 c. 
 
 2. Tvorepa — air co] Sc. \eKTecv. 
 
 avro), unemphatic, resuming 
 
 ravTov and Bdrepov. 
 
 4. Ka\ nep\ TreVre] Cf. supr. 
 243 e : Ka\ Tpla to TTav aXka firj 
 8vo K.T.X. 
 
 as ovrav] For the posi- 
 tion of cos, cf. ravrbv cos ovra 
 a few lines below, and iraialv cos 
 ovo-iv rj/juv supr. 242 d. 
 
 5. rj to re tuvtov] " Or in 
 
 saying Same and Other, are we 
 unconsciously speaking as of 
 one of those former ideas?" 
 
 1 6. irepl yap — spclvtiov] Heind. 
 " Nam alter utrum eorum utrum- 
 vis (sive motus sive status) 
 
 quando in utroque inerit (in 
 motu vel statu) alteram coget 
 in contrariam rursus suae na- 
 turam abire, quoniam hoc alte- 
 rum contrarii particeps factum 
 est." This is right, and has been 
 wrongly criticised by Badham, 
 who does not appear to see 
 that the second ddrepov must 
 be correlative to the first. But 
 Heind. and Stallb. do not seem 
 to have observed that the case 
 is still general, and is only ap- 
 plied to TavTbv and Odrepov in 
 the next sentence. The argu- 
 ment is this : — Best and mo- 
 tion cannot be identified either 
 with Same or Other. For if 
 either rest or motion were 
 identified with anything which 
 is predicable of both, motion 
 would rest and rest Avould 
 move : inasmuch as that (whe- 
 
2CHM2TH2. 
 
 1.01 
 
 255' yiyvop^evov avTolv dvayKaaet /xeTa(3a\\etv av Odrepov 
 b em tovvuvtlov Trjs clvtov (pvorecos, are jieTaaypv tov 
 evavTiov. 
 
 GEAI. Kofiidfi ye. 
 
 HE. MeTe'^erov fiyv d/i(j)co tovtov /cat Oarepov. 5 
 
 GEAI. Na/. 
 
 HE. Mr) tolwv Xeycoptev Kivqaiv y elvai ravrov 
 7] Oarepov, firjS' av (ndcriv. 
 
 GEAI. Mt) ydp. 
 
 HE. 'AAA' dpa to ov teal to tovtov go? ev tl 10 
 oiavoryreov r)fuv ; 
 
 GEAI. "laws. 
 
 HE. 'AAA' el TO OV KOLL TO TOVTOV fxqbev Sid(f)opov 
 arjfiaiveTov, klvyjctlv av iraXiv /cat o~Tao~iv d/KpoTepa 
 
 Motion, 
 and hence 
 
 identifii d 
 with either. 
 For being 
 identified 
 
 with one 
 and then 
 predicated 
 
 of the 
 other, 
 either of 
 them, as 
 the case 
 might be, 
 would 
 cause Mo- 
 tion to be 
 predicated 
 of Rest, or 
 Rest of 
 Motion. 
 And Being 
 and Same- 
 ness are 
 not one : 
 
 eivai XeyovTes a/x0orepa ovtcos amd Tamov d>s ovTa 15 f ke *? *?J' 
 c 7rpoo-epov/j.ev. 
 
 GEAI. 'AAAa firjv tovto ye ddvvaTov. 
 
 HE. ' ASvvaTOv dpa TavTov /cat to ov ev elvai. 
 
 GEAI. ^yeoov. 
 
 ,_ ,_, m , o,\ \ ~ v ,,* 9^ Sameness, 
 
 A'E. TeTapTOV Or) TTpOS TOW TpiCTlV eioecnv etOOff 20 therefore, 
 
 y , x is a fourth 
 
 to TavTov TLUcofxev ; 
 
 and Rest 
 both are, 
 we should 
 imply that 
 they are 
 both the 
 
 ther rest or motion) which was 
 so identified with the common 
 predicable, becoming thus pre- 
 dicate of both, will cause the 
 other (whether motion or rest) 
 to be changed, as thus parti- 
 cipating (by the force of predi- 
 cation) in the opposite nature. 
 But sameness and difference 
 are predicable both of motion 
 and rest. Therefore neither mo- 
 tion nor rest can be identified 
 either with sameness or differ- 
 
 ence. 
 7- 
 
 Mj) toivvv] " Let us not 
 
 therefore identify Same or 
 Other with motion, nor yet 
 with rest." Cf. Pha?do 103, 4. 
 
 13. 'AAV el — Trpoaepovfiei'] 
 
 " But if the words Being and 
 Sameness have no difference of 
 meaning, then again in saying 
 that motion and rest both are 
 we shall speak of them as being 
 both the same" 
 
 20. e'Sos] Omitted in Bodl. 
 A. n., but probably genuine. 
 The Same is not only separate 
 from the remaining kinds, but 
 is itself to be recognized as a 
 
 kind, dis- 
 tinct from 
 the other 
 three. 
 
1 52 
 
 IIAATQNOS 
 
 Nor can 
 ( (thernesa 
 be identi- 
 fied willi 
 Being : else 
 
 tln'ivwmilil 
 be an abso- 
 lute Other- 
 ness, as 
 there is an 
 absolute 
 Being. But 
 the Other 
 is always 
 relative to 
 an Other. 
 
 And so 
 the Other 
 is to be 
 recognized 
 as a fifth 
 kind. And 
 it is at the 
 same time 
 perceived 
 to extend 
 to all the 
 kinds. For 
 each of 
 them has 
 now been 
 distin- 
 guished 
 from the 
 
 0EAI. n avv /xev ovv. p. 2jj 
 
 AE. TV Se ; to Ourepov apa rjpuv XeKTeov we'/A- 
 
 7TT0V ; 1] TOVTO KOLL TO OV 6i<S hv OCTTU OVO/JLUTU e(j) 
 
 ein yevei 8iavoeia0ai Sel ; 
 s 6EAI. Tax «*• 
 
 aE. AAA' oifiai ae avyyoopelv tow ovtcov d 
 tcl p.ev avTa kglO' avTa, to. 8e irpos aXXrjXa de\ 
 XeyeaOai. 
 
 6EAI. T/ 8 ov ; 
 to SrE. To <$' ercpop del npbs eTepov. rj yap ; 
 0EAI. Ovtcos. 
 
 aE. Ovk av, el ye to ov /cat to darepov /xrj 7rd/x- 
 7roXv 8ie(f)epeTr)v' dXX* e'hrep Oarepov dp.(f)oiv \xeTelye 
 toIv eiSolv uicnrep to ov, tjv av 7tot€ tl /cat tcov 
 i$€Tepcov eTepov ov irpos eTepov. vvv 8e dreyyas r)puv 
 o tl irep av eTepov y, av/jLfie'firjKev efj dvdyKrjs eTepov 
 tovto o irep ecrTiv eivai. 
 
 distinct kind or foiTn. iva.pi6y.ov 
 
 tcov noWcov ovtcov ei8os ev (infr. 
 
 258 c). The Bodleian MS. 
 errs more often by omission 
 than by insertion. The dis- 
 tinction between Being and 
 Sameness is hardly maintained 
 in what follows. 
 
 6. 'AXX' olfiai rj yap ;] " Of 
 
 existences, some are absolute, 
 some correlative: other is al- 
 ways relative to other." Here 
 absolute and relative are dis- 
 tinct ei'Sq, but are only alluded 
 to in passing. (Cf. Phileb. 
 51c: ravra yap ovk rival irpos Tl 
 KaXa — ciXX' del KaXa. icaff avrd.) 
 12. Ovk av eivai] "That 
 
 could not be if Being and Other 
 were not widely different. If 
 
 Other had partaken of both 
 kinds (absolute and relative), 
 as Being does, there would have 
 been a time when some one of 
 the class of Other things were 
 Other otherwise than in rela- 
 tion to Other. But in reality 
 we find that whatever is Other 
 must of necessity be what it is 
 in relation to an Other." For 
 the gen. hepov, cf. Rep. 4, 438 e: 
 
 oo~a iariv oia eivai tov, and 439 
 a '. 011 tovtcov Brjcrei tcov tivos 
 
 eivai onep eo-Tiv. It is not ob- 
 served that TavTbv is also a 
 relative term (irpos n). But 
 a thing may be TaiiTov in rela- 
 tion to itself, and so not rrp6<; 
 eTepov or 7rpor aWrjha. Cf. 
 
 Thea3t. 185 b. 
 
2CXM2TH2. 
 
 153 
 
 15$. 0EAI. Aeyets KaOdirep e'xei. 
 
 SE. Heinrrov 8rj tyjv Oarepov (fivcriv XeKreov ev 
 e tqLs e'lSeaw ovaais, ev ols 7rpoaipov/uLe0a. 
 
 GEAI. Nat. 
 
 EE. Kai Sia iravTcov ye avTTjv avrcou (f)/]o~o/j.ev , 
 elvai $Le\r)\v6vLav ev ekaarov yap erepov elvai tcov 
 aXXcov ov did rrjv avrov (pvcriv, dXXd 81a, to pteTeyeiv 
 T7j9 I8eas rrjs Oarepov. 
 
 GEAI. Kofjudfj fxev ovv. 
 
 SE, ( 0<5e 8rj Xeycop.ev eirl tcov irevTe Ka9' > ev . 
 avaXafifidvovres. 
 
 GEAI. My; 
 
 £7E. TlpcDTOv jxev Kivncriv, coy eari Travrdirao-iv 
 erepov o-rdaeoos. r) Iras Xeycop.ev ; 
 
 GEAI. Ovtcos. 
 
 SE. Ov ardai9 dp earlv. 
 
 GEAI. OvSa/im. 
 256. JgE. "Ecrrt Be ye did to [xereyeiv tov ovtqs. 
 
 GEAI. "Eotiv. 
 
 3. eV 01? Trpoaipovjj.e6aj Equi- 
 valent to a irpoaip. ev is re- 
 peated by attraction from the 
 previous clause. " Posterius 
 in his iv tanquam e precedente 
 syllaba, natum expungerem, ni 
 obstaret ejusdem modi exem- 
 plum apud Xenoph. de Vectig. 
 
 iv. I 3 : 'Air avrwv pev ovv eyaiye, 
 d(p' av peXXa Xeyeiv, ovoev ri 
 d£ia> 6avpd£ea6ai <aj dvaevperov 
 Ti egevprjKas." (Heind.) 
 
 I O. eVt t£>v irevre] These five 
 " chief kinds of Being" are 
 adopted by Plotinus, who, in 
 forming his complex notion 
 of the Highest Truth, prefers 
 them, in combination with the 
 ti-iple ovala of the Philebus, to 
 
 the categories of Aristotle. 
 Ennead V, b. 1, VI, b. 2. He 
 makes a distinction, which in 
 Plato is hardly present, be- 
 tween a swrvmum genus and a 
 constituent element of absolute 
 Being. 
 
 1 1 . dva\ap,^dvovres] " Kesum- 
 ing," a technical word in Pla- 
 tonic discussion, cf. Theset. 
 187 c and note. Perhaps here 
 used more literally, " taking 
 them up to examine them one 
 by one." 
 
 13. Kivrjaiv] Sc. Xeycopev. 
 
 1 6. Ov ardais tip* earlv] Here 
 the Other is for the first time 
 seen to be identical with Ne- 
 gation. 
 
 rest, not li> 
 '1 of 
 
 i. but 
 through 
 
 participa- 
 tion in the 
 Form of 
 Otherness. 
 
 ' Thus, first 
 of all, Mo- 
 tion is 
 Other than 
 Rest : i.e. 
 is not Rest. 
 YetMotion 
 is, because 
 Motion 
 partakes 
 of Being. 
 Again, 
 Motion is 
 Other than 
 the Same : 
 is not the 
 Same. Yet 
 Motion 
 partakes 
 
 c of Same- 
 ness, and 
 is the same 
 Motion. 
 We must 
 not quarrel 
 with this 
 result, that 
 Motion is 
 the Same 
 and not the 
 
154 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 Same, for 
 each ex- 
 pression is 
 true, but 
 in a differ- 
 ent respect. 
 Motion is 
 the same 
 w itli itself 
 through 
 participa- 
 tion in the 
 Form of 
 Sameness, 
 not the 
 Same, 
 through 
 partaking 
 of the 
 Other, 
 whereby it 
 is separated 
 and be- 
 comes 
 Other than 
 the Form 
 of the 
 Same. 
 Indeed, as 
 we have 
 shewn that 
 in the na- 
 ture of 
 things 
 there must 
 
 S*E. AvOis Si) ttolXlv i) k'ivi-i<tls erepov ravrov P- 256. 
 
 IdTlV. 
 
 0EAI. 2 X e^. 
 SE. Ov ravrov apa ecrrlv. 
 5 GEAI. Ov yap ovv. 
 
 SE. 'AAAa pL7)v avTTj y r)v ravrov Sid to p.ere- 
 
 \€LV at) TTOLVT aVTOV. 
 
 GEAI. Kcu /xaAa. 
 
 HE. Ti)v KLvrjcriv 8rj ravrov r eivai Ka\ fxr) 
 o ravrov bp.o\oyr)reov K.a\ ov ftvayepavreov. ov yap 
 orav etirtopiev avrrjv ravrov /ecu pr/ ravrov, 6p.ola>? 
 eiprjKapiev, aAA' birorav pcev ravrov, did rrjv p.eOe^iv 
 ravrov 777)0? iavrtjv ovrco Xeyopev, orav be pj] rav- b 
 rov, 81a. rrjv Koivcovlav av Oarepov, oY rjv aTro^copL^o- 
 ip.£vr) ravrov yeyovev ovk eicelvo aAA' erepov, coo-re 
 opOcos av Xeyerac ttoKlv ov ravrov. 
 
 GEAI. Udvv pcev ovv. 
 
 SE. Ovkovv kolv el tttj p.ereXap.(3avev avrrj klvt]- 
 
 1. Avdis 8tj irdXiv] "Again." 
 I. e. To make a new beginning 
 from the same point, viz. ki- 
 vrjais. 
 
 7. avToii] Sc. rov ravrov. 
 Cf. supr. 254 d, to which rjv 
 refers. rrdvra is therefore re- 
 stricted to being, rest, and 
 motion, as 8ia navrcov — avruv, 
 
 p. 255 d, to the five "kinds." 
 av marks the opposition be- 
 tween the reason now given 
 and the words r) iclvr}o~is erepov 
 ravrov ecTTiv. 
 
 JO. 0x1 hvo-^epavreov] "We must 
 not quarrel with this contra- 
 diction ;'' cf. Theset. 155a: ov 
 Svo-KoXaivovres. Gorg. 450 e : 
 v7roXa/3ot av ris, el (HovXoiro 8vo-- 
 Xepaiveiv iv rols Xoyois. 
 
 ov yap — opoicos elprjicauev] 
 Cf. Rep. 5, 454 b : eVecrKe^d- 
 p.e6a he ovS" onyovv rl ethos to 
 rrjs erepas re Ka\ rr/s avrrjs (pv- 
 creas Kal irpbs rl relvov <i>pi£6p.eda 
 Tore k.t.X. 
 
 13. irpbs eavrTjv ovra> \eyouev\ 
 
 " We call it so (the same) in 
 relation to itself." 
 
 orav — ravrov] " But when 
 we speak of it as not the Same, 
 this is because of the participa- 
 tion in the Other, whereby it 
 is severed from the Same, and 
 has become not that but an 
 Other, so that again it is rightly- 
 spoken of as not the Same." 
 
 18. avrr) k'lvx]o-is] Here, and 
 supr. 252 c!, distinguished from 
 the Trddrjp.a Kivi]aeas. It is im- 
 
20<i>irrH2. 
 
 155 
 
 256. ats (TTaaecos, ovoev av aroirov r\v aTa.cnp.ov ai>Ti)v be a 00m- 
 
 z munion of 
 
 Trpoaayopeveiv ; kinds, wo 
 
 apat T\ a' ' " " ~ should not 
 
 WEAL UpuoTOLTa ye, enrep tcov yevcov avyywpr}- be stagger- 
 
 cropieOa ra pev dXXrjXoi? eOeXetv p.lyvvcr$ai, to. oe p.rj. mgth&t 
 
 r> Ipn IT v v ' ' N ' ' ' ' Motion, 
 
 AJi.. J\ai pLYJV €7TL y€ TT]V TOUTOV TTpOTepOV CLTTO-B quaMo- 
 
 » > * " ~ * J. ' /) » ■\ ' t v \ tion, was 
 
 oei^iv y tcov vvv a(piKopeua, eXey^ovTes coy eorf Kara stationary, 
 
 j / / if there 
 
 puow raurr;. were any 
 
 r>T^ at n « J v . manner of 
 
 BEA1. llwy 7a/) ov ; commu . 
 SE. Ae.ycop.ev 8rj irdXiv' 77 klvtjctls Icttlv erepov 
 
 nion be- 
 tween M 
 tion and 
 
 tov erepov, KaOdirep tglvtov re -qv aXXo kou tyjs 10 ^° n t 
 ardaecos" ; 
 
 0EAI. ' ' AvayKctiov. 
 
 £?E. Oi;^ erepov dp eo~Ti ny kou erepov Kara tov 
 vvv Srj Xoyov. 
 
 0EAI. 'AX^. 
 
 HE . Tt oi)j> £77 ro /uera tovto ; apa raw juez> 
 
 Once more: 
 Motion is 
 Other than 
 the Other, 
 and so 
 Other and 
 not Other 
 at once. 
 
 And as we 
 have 1 
 
 TpiQQV €T€pOV GLVTTJV (firjCTOpieV elvat, TOV Se TerdpTOV ken of five 
 
 kinds, 
 
 d p.7] (pcopiev, op.oXoyr/o~avTes avra eivou irevre, irepi cov there re- 
 
 \ > <? ' /1 / /1 « mains a 
 
 kou ev 01? rrpovoepeOa crKorreiv ; fourth to 
 
 plied that motion does not 
 partake of rest. Yet there is 
 a tendency in this dialogue to 
 attribute necessity or perma- 
 nence to the idea of motion. 
 
 5. Kaififjv — ravTTj] Supr. 252. 
 
 9. erepov rov erepov^ In this 
 
 argument motion appears in 
 one and the same expression 
 as other and not other. Cf. 
 Theset. 165 h,c, compared with 
 the preceding argument ; and 
 for a similar refinement on 
 erepov, ib. 1 89 c, where, how- 
 ever, the contradiction is merely 
 verbal, as in Euthyd. 301. 
 
 Having made this step, we 
 are prepared to understand 
 
 X 
 
 more easily that motion at 
 once is and is not. 
 
 14. 877] To be taken, not 
 closely with vvv, but with the 
 whole sentence. 
 
 16. apa tcov pev~\ dp' avrcov, 
 
 the reading of the best MSS., 
 is probably due to avrrjv just 
 below, dp ov, which Bekker 
 and the Zurich editors ap- 
 prove, is rightly rejected by 
 Stallbaum, who reads apa with 
 seven MSS. 
 
 18. avra] Sc. to. yevrj. 
 
 19. iv ols] " Within the 
 sphere of which." ev, as in 
 Theset. 152 c : ev re Beppols 
 kuX irdari rols roiovrois. 
 
156 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 be distin- 
 guished 
 
 I'mm Mo- 
 tion, M"- 
 tiun is ncit 
 Being, but 
 partakes of 
 Being, and 
 so is and is 
 not in the 
 most abso- 
 lute sense. 
 
 Thus there 
 is found an 
 existence 
 of Not- 
 Being, oc- 
 casioned by 
 the nature 
 of the 
 Other, in 
 the case of 
 Motion, 
 and in that 
 of each of 
 the kinds, 
 Being not 
 excepted. 
 For Being 
 
 GEAI. Kal 7TW? ; ubvvaTov yap avy\a)pu.v p. 256. jj,; 
 eXuTTCo tov dpiOpbv tov vvv 8rj (fjave'vTO?. 
 
 SE. 'A5ewy apa ttjv kivijctiv erepov eivai tov bv- 
 T09 Siapca^opevoL Xeycopev ; 
 5 GEAI. ' Adeearara pev ovv. 
 
 HE. Ovkovv 81) aa(f)a>9 r\ Kip^cris ovtoo? ovk ov 
 
 e<TTl KCU OP, €7r€L7T€p TOV OVTOS p.€T€)(ei \ 
 
 GEAI. 1a(j)€aTard ye. 
 
 HE. 'Eotm/ apa e£ uvdyKr)? to p.r) bv iiri re 
 10 KiV7]cr€co9 eivai Kal KaTa iravTa Ta yevrj. KaTa iravTa 
 yap rj OaTepov (pvcri? erepov direpya^opevr] tov ovtos e 
 €K.acrTOV ovk ov woieL, Kal fjvprravTa Srj kutcc Tama 
 OVTC09 ovk ovTa bpOco? epovpev, Kal iraXtv, otl p.eTeyei 
 tov ovtos, eivat re Kal bvTa. 
 15 GEAI. KcvSvvevei. 
 
 HE. He pi eKao~TOv apa twv elSav ttoXv pev £o~tl 
 to 6v, anreipov 8e irX-qOei to pr] ov. 
 
 2. (fravevTos] " WTiicli shewed 
 itself." It is implied that the 
 argument has proceeded, as 
 usual, without the will of the 
 speakers ; i. e. has not been 
 developed arbitrarily. 
 
 4. diapaxdpevoi] The notion 
 of violence, and of a conflict 
 with the Sophist, implied in 
 
 ftuifcadai and 8iapaxr]Teov, 242 d, 
 
 is continued here. 
 
 9. "Ecttiv apa] I. e. What has 
 now been said of motion must 
 be necessarily true of every- 
 thing except the idea of Being. 
 
 Constr. ecrri to pr] of eivai, 
 
 " It is true that that which 
 is not, is," " The existence of 
 Not-Being is a fact," " not 
 only in the case of motion, but 
 in every kind. For the nature 
 
 of difference, extending to all, 
 divides each thing from Being, 
 and makes it not- Being, and 
 so in this way we shall be 
 right in saying that all things 
 whatsoever are not-Being, and 
 again because they partake in 
 Being that they are and have 
 being." 
 
 II. 17 OaTepov (pvo~is~\ For the 
 expression, cf. Parm. 156 e : 
 
 aXX' 17 e^ai^i^s avrr) cj>ucns aro- 
 ttos tis eyKa6r)Tai pera^ii ri)s kivtj- 
 creoos re Kal ardaecos, ev XP° V( ? 
 ovdevl ovcra, Ka\ eh ravTTjv 8r) Ka\ 
 en TavTrjs to Te Kivoipevov ueTa- 
 /3d\Xet en\ to io-rdvai /cat to 
 eo-Tos eVi to KivelaSai. 
 
 1*7. aneipov 8e ir\i]8ei to prj 6V] 
 
 The argument is tacitly car- 
 ried a step in advance. It 
 
20<MrrH2. 
 
 157 
 
 0EAI. "EoiKev. is Other 
 
 , v ,\ > \ ^ v r/ than 
 
 aE. Ol>/couV /cat ro 6^ afro raw aAAcov erepov remaining 
 
 , kind, and 
 
 elvai XeKTeOV. is once for 
 
 , all itself, 
 
 0EAI. AvayKy. hut is ,„,/ 
 
 —IT? x? v v * " » ' " r ' ' ' v "\\ timeswith- 
 
 &&. l\ai to ov ap rjp.iv, oaa irep eari ra aAAa, 5 out num. 
 
 \ ~ » v > ~ \ . ,\ ,v \ tier. We 
 
 /cara roaavra ovk eariv. eKeiva yap ovk ov ev jiev must ac- 
 
 > \ v ,/ j\ v > n \ -?x-v » cept these 
 
 avTO earns, arrepavra be rov apiup.ov raAAa ovk apparent 
 
 3/ •? di.screpan- 
 
 €<TTIV av. cies, since 
 
 GEAI. 2x 6 ^^ OVTCOS. Terted the 3 ' 
 
 »4-I2j. Ui>/cow ot; /ecu ravra ov ovayepavreov, eirei- i° n j ono f 
 
 7re/9 e'xti KOtvooviav aAArjAoi? r) raiv yevmv (pvai?. el ^^^ 
 
 8e tls ravra fir] avy^copel, rreiaas rjficov rods e/iwpo- S^wtth 
 
 a6ev Aoyovs ovrco TretOerco ra ftera ravra. ff't^ft 
 
 0EAI. AiKaiorara etprjKa?. that thesis. 
 
 £?E. ,f I8a>[iev dr) real rode. 15 
 
 0EAI. To irolov ; 
 
 SE. 'Q7r6rai> ro fir) ov Aeycop.ev, ws* eoinev, ovk 
 evavrlov ri Aeyo/iev rov ovro?, aAA' erepov fiovov. 
 
 0EAI. Um; 
 
 is assumed that the Baripov 
 <pv(Tis differentiates each thing- 
 riot only from Being in the 
 abstract, but from every other 
 existing kind except itself : so 
 that it is not each in turn. 
 
 5. oaa irep — ovk eariv] Cf. 
 Theset. 171a (where Protagoras 
 is put to silence) : Baa nXeiovs 
 ois fxT] ooKel fj oh ooKel, roaovrco 
 fiaXkop ovk 'iariv 77 eariv. 
 
 10. Ka\ Tavra] "We must not 
 quarrel with this, any more 
 than with the former result." 
 
 Ka\ refers to ov ova\epavTeov in 
 
 p. 256 a. 
 
 12. nelaas — tovs Aoyovs] The 
 arguments are half-personi- 
 fied. For the sentiment, com- 
 
 pare Gorg. 472 bj and for 
 rjp.au tovs ~\6yovs, supr. 239 c: 
 
 dvTikap{3av6p.evos Tjp,a>v dnoarpe- 
 i|/-ei tovs \6yovs. 
 
 13. 7rei#eVa>] Sc. rjpas. 
 
 By the same means, by 
 which it is shewn that that- 
 which-is-not is, the nature of 
 that-whick-is-not is made plain. 
 ISTot- Being is not the opposite 
 of Being, but only other than 
 Being. This is now further 
 illustrated. According to the 
 preceding argument /*?) ov must 
 here include the negation of 
 Being in the abstract and the 
 negation of the several kinds 
 of Beino-. 
 
FIAATONOS 
 
 Not-Being, 
 then, or 
 negative 
 determina- 
 tion, is not 
 contrary to 
 Being, or 
 positive 
 determina- 
 tion, but 
 only differ- 
 ent in each 
 case from a 
 particular 
 positive 
 determina- 
 tion. 
 
 aK. Olov otolv e'lTrwpev tl fir) pe'ya, TOTe paXXov p. 257.jp. 
 tl aot (j)aLvope6a to apiKpov r] to taov hrfkovv tco 
 pi)fiaTL ; 
 
 6EAI. Kal TTcGy; 
 5 SE. Ouk ap, IvavTiov mav u7ro(f)aaL9 Xeyrjrcu 
 m-jpaiveLv, avy^coprjaopeda, too~ovtov 8e povov, otl 
 tlov aXXcov tl pTjvvei to pr) kcu to ov irpoTLOepeva 
 tcov eiriovTcov ovopaTtov, paXXov he tcov it pay 'pax cov c 
 7repl cltt av K€7]Tat Ta eirL(j)6eyyopeva vaTepov ttjs 
 )oa.7ro(f)ao~€Q)S bvofiaTa. 
 
 0EAI. WavTanracri pev ovv. 
 
 SE. T68e 8e 8iai>or)6cop€i>, el kcu cro\ ^vvhoKel. 
 
 0EAI. To 7rolov ; 
 
 2. r<5 pT]nari] " The expres- 
 sion." The word is used, with 
 exactness = the predicate : not 
 ovofian or Xoya. 
 
 5. aTro'^acris] The word oc- 
 curs only in the Soph., Cra- 
 tylus, and Apology of Plato; 
 and in this place signifies not 
 the negative proposition, but 
 the negative particle. 
 
 7. tu>v aXXaiv tl prjvvei'] 
 
 Compare Kant, Kritik der 
 Keinen Vernunft (Leipzig, 
 1853) page 101. Indefinite 
 Judgments : — " Nun habe ich 
 durch den Satz — die Seele 
 ist nicht sterblich, zwar der 
 logischen form nach wirklich 
 bejaht, indem ich die Seele 
 in den unbeschrankten Urn- 
 fang der nicht Sterblichen 
 Wesen setze. Weil nun von 
 dem ganzen Umfange rnogli- 
 cher Wesen das Sterbliche 
 einen Theil enth'alt, das Nicht 
 sterbende aber den anderen, 
 so ist durch meinen Satz nicht 
 
 anderes gesagt als dass die 
 Seele eines von der Unendli- 
 chem menge Dinge sei, die 
 iibrig bleiben wenn ich das 
 Sterbliche insgesammt weg- 
 nehme," u. s. w. 
 
 The difficulty of conceiving 
 fifj ov as a yevos is parallel to 
 that felt in the Philebus about 
 the aneipov, p. 26 d : feat tol 
 TToWd ye Kal to aneipov nape- 
 axeTO yevrj, Spas §' enio-cppayi- 
 u6(vTa to> tov paXXov Kal evav- 
 t'iov yevei, \v ecpdvr]. 
 
 8. ovopaTav, paXXov 8e tq>v 
 7rpaypara>v] The genitives are 
 governed by t5>v aXXcov. " The 
 prefixes ov and p.rj point to 
 something different from the 
 words which follow them, or 
 rather from the things which 
 the words uttered after the 
 negative import." 
 
 12. ToSe Se biavot]6u>pev\ "Let 
 
 us, now, cari-y our minds 
 through this matter." 
 
2CMM2TH2. 159 
 
 25J. S*E. 'H Oarepov /jlol (f)vais (Palverai KarciKeKep- 
 \iaricr6ai Kadairep eVr larr/pr]. 
 
 GEM. nw. 
 
 £?E. Mia ixev earl irov koll Ikuvt). to <$' liri rep Otherness 
 
 , ' , „ r/ a\ > orDiffer- 
 
 yiyvo\xzvov fiepo? avTrjs €kclo~toi> a(popLcruev eirwvv- 5 encehas 
 
 r 3/ v , « » » / j,\ x \ ^ ' , as many 
 
 d /xiocz/ Kj^ef r^a eavTrjs lOiav olo ttoAAoll re^vai r branches as 
 
 , s , v , „ Knowledge 
 
 eiai Aeyopevai koll €7ricrTi]fiaL. lias: each 
 
 r\r< a t rr ' > 9 of which is 
 
 UJliAl. llOLVV fJL€l> OVV. expressed 
 
 /— <t\ r\ ' \ \ « /l > J' ' ^ j y putting 
 
 A£j. KJVKOVV KOLL TOL T7]S VCLTtpOV (pV(T€CdS /JLOpiOL the word 
 
 fiLas ovar)? TavTOu ireirovOe tovto. 10 fore the 
 
 0EAI. Tax av' aAA' oirrj 8r) Xeycopev ; onToAhe 
 
 3*E. "Ecm r» KaAw rt darepov popiov olvtltl- knowledge. 
 $€fxevov ; 
 
 0EAL *Earur. 
 
 HE. Tour' ovv avcovvpLOv epovpev rj riv eypv eirca- 15 
 vvpclav ; 
 
 GEAI. 'E^o^* o yap /A17 kolaov eKaarore (f)6ey- 
 yo/ji€0a, tovto ovk aXXov twos erepov icrriu r) ttjs 
 rod kolXov (pvaeoj?. 
 
 £?E. 'Wi vvv, rode p.01 Ae'ye. 20 
 
 e GEAI. To iroiov ; 
 
 SE. 'AAAo n tgsv ovtcov tivos \evos~\ yevovs Every such 
 
 I. KaTaKeKcpiiaTiadai] For a by Te^vai Kai eTTiaTrjfiai follow- 
 
 similar use of this favourite ing. 
 
 word, cf. Parm. 144 b : (to $v) IO. tovtciv — tovto] eirawpiap 
 
 KaTaKeKep/iaTio-Tai cipa a>s oioVre I8iav €KO.o~tov e^ei <a\ TtoWa io~Ti. 
 afxiKpoTaTa (%t is o-fiiKpoTaral^ 1 1. dXX' ottj] 5?) Xeycop-evj] "But 
 
 mil fie'yicTTa Kai 7ravTax£ys ovtcl. shall we determine how?" 
 
 4. to 8' «ri rep yiyvofievoii] The Bodl. has oXAojtj sin. ace. 
 Cf. Kep. 6, 511 d, e, for this 22. "AAAo ti — fifj xakov] ivos, 
 
 use of inl with the dative. which Hermann retains on the 
 
 6. eavTJjs] This is omitted authority of the Bodleian MS., 
 
 in one MS. (Par. E.), but is to is omitted thei*e as well as in 
 
 be retained. The gender is An. The reasoning seems to 
 
 n-pos to o-Tjp.aiv6p.evoi>, but helped require that the words should 
 
1 (>■() 
 
 OAATONQ2 
 
 has a real U(f)Opl(T0ei> KGU irpos Tl TCOV OVTCOV CLV TToklV UVTLTt- p. 2^7 
 
 significance v r , . , 7 v v , 
 
 and de- 0€l> OVTCO ^up/3el3l]K€U dvai TO fXI] KOiXov ; 
 
 notes all Qp . r ^c 
 
 that is dis- OJiAl. KJVTCOS. 
 
 tinguished _, „ x * * I 1 ' 71 ' f * 
 
 from the AEj. KJVT09 Ot) 7T/0O? OV |_??J UVTlUeCTlS, CO? €CU/C , 
 
 object in 9 , , , - , v , 
 
 question. 5 tlVCU JTLJ avpjdaiVeL TO /JL7] KGCAOV. 
 
 0EAI. 'OpflcWa. 
 
 SE. Ti ow ; /carcc tovtov tov Xoyov dpa p.aX- 
 Xov pev to kolXov rjpuv ear! tcov ovtcov, tjttov Se to 
 paj kclXov ; 
 
 be rendered thus : " Does not 
 this constitute the existence of 
 the Not-Beautiful 1 " (clXXo tl 
 
 ovtco o-vp.^e',3rjKev elvai to lltj 
 
 Kakov.) " ist, that it is parted 
 off (a<$opio-8ev) as belonging to 
 a certain kind of existences 
 (rivbs yevovs tcov ovtcov : for the 
 gen., cf. Eep. 4, 438 d); 2nd, 
 that it is set over against 
 something which exists." A 
 simpler rendering of the words 
 may possibly be right if suffi- 
 cient stress is laid upon ehai. 
 " The Not-Beautiful, as distin- 
 guished from a certain kind of 
 existence, and again as op- 
 posed to an existing some- 
 what, has thus an existence of 
 its own." But the words av 
 wd\iv indicate that the tl t£>v 
 ovtcov is different from the 
 yeW. The former interpreta- 
 tion is confirmed by compar- 
 ing supra 257 c in the cor- 
 responding partition of know- 
 ledge : to 8' inl Tcp yiyvo/xc-vov 
 p-epos avTrjs €<acrTov dcpopiadev — 
 where hri tco yiyvofxevov answers 
 to the genitive here. Accord- 
 ing to this rendering, the read- 
 ing el/6?, although omitted in 
 the Bodleian MS., is not clearly 
 wronar. 
 
 4. ' Ovtos S17 7rp6s ov — fxr] 
 KaXoV] 17 is omitted before 
 uvtL6c-o-i<: in Bodl. A n, and 
 has been rejected by Stall- 
 baum and C F. Hermann : ti 
 after elvai is omitted only in 
 Flor. c, i, but can hardly be 
 retained. It was omitted by 
 Stephanus. If 17 and tl are 
 retained, the words must be 
 construed thus : " Then it re- 
 sults that the opposition of 
 the Not-Beautiful" (17 dvTidecris, 
 to p.ri koXov, apposition) "is one" 
 (lit. "something," tl) "between 
 being and being." Omitting 
 17 and tl we should render " It 
 results then that the notion 
 of 'not-beautiful' is an oppo- 
 sition of being to being." 
 
 In the use of dvTideo-ts here, 
 as of ovcria below (p. 258 b), 
 there is some confusion be- 
 tween abstract and concrete. 
 
 avTidecris crvpftalvei] The 
 
 Bodl. has dvTiBecriv and elvai tl. 
 If avTiBeaiv is right, crvfJ.(3alvei 
 is impersonal. 
 
 9. p.r] koXov] Cf. Parm. 160 
 b : Tt 8' e'l tis \eyoi, el fieye8os 
 
 fXTj eCTTLV 77 O-fllKpOTTJS LLTj eCTTLV 
 
 7} tl aXXo tcov tolovtcov, ap' €<£' 
 eicdo-Tov civ SrjXol oti erepdV tl 
 Xeyet to [if] ov ; I. e. that the 
 
20<M2TH2. 
 
 1G1 
 
 257. 0EAI. OvSev. 
 
 258. £?E. 'O/uotW a/)a to //.)) /xeya /cat to //€ya aurb 
 eluai Ae/creou ; 
 
 0EAI. 'Ofioim. 
 
 A*E. Oweotw /cat ro fir) Sikcuov tg> Sikolicd Kara 
 TOOJTOL Oereou npb? to fir)8ei> tl fiaXXov eivai darepov 
 Oarepov ; 
 
 9EAI. Tifirfv; 
 
 3?E. Kal rdXXa Sr) Tavrrj Xetjofieit, iirehrep r) 6a- 
 repov (pvcris tcpavr) twv ovtcdv ovo~a, eKeivr)? Se ovarjs 
 avayKq Sr) /cat tol fibpia ai)Tr)s fir)8evbs ryrrov ovtol 
 TiOevai. 
 
 0EAI. ITa)? yap ov; 
 
 SE- Ovkovv, 639 eoLKtv, r) tt/s Oarepov fiopiov <pv- 
 
 h crecos Ka\ rrjs rod ovtos irpbs akXrfXa avriKeifiivcov 
 
 avridecris ouSeis rynov, el 6ifiis direlv, avrov rov ovtos 
 
 Thus each 
 of the parts 
 
 IO of Other 
 has a real 
 existence, 
 and the 
 opposition 
 between 
 the several 
 parts of 
 Being and 
 Other is 
 
 x 5 also Being. 
 
 thing denied (or negatively 
 predicated) in each case is 
 different. 
 
 2. 'Ofioias c'ipa] " Then the 
 not-great must be said to exist 
 equally with the great." (avro 
 
 to peya.} 
 
 5. t» 8iKaiq> — 6eriov\ " Be 
 
 put in the same category with 
 the just so far as their equally 
 existing is concerned." For 
 the limitation with 7rpo?, cf. 
 
 Phsedo 75 a • Ta^T-O" y^p scttiv, 
 3> 2., TTpos ye o fiovXerai 8r)\ooo-ai 
 6 \6yos. 
 
 14. f) — avTideo-is] The order 
 
 is 7] avTi6e<ris popiov rrjs darepov 
 (pvo~ea>s koi (poplovj ttjs rov ovtos 
 7rp6s aWrfka avTiKeipevmv. The 
 
 rendering of Heindorf and 
 Stallbaum, " oppositio naturas 
 partis alicujus," is objection- 
 
 able, because the expression 
 darepov (pdais has been already 
 appropriated to the Other in 
 general. Besides, the argument 
 does not lead here to the con- 
 trast of Being and all other 
 ideas, but to that between ex- 
 isting things and their nega- 
 tions. The present is simply 
 the generalization of the pre- 
 ceding argument. The mean- 
 ing is, in other words, that 
 negation is, equally with affir- 
 mation, a real determination of 
 thought. 
 
 16. el depis elne'iv] Another 
 expression of the awe in which 
 the idea of Being was held 
 (on which vid. supra p. 243 c) ; 
 also marking anew the reluc- 
 tance with which the authority 
 of Parmenides is impugned. 
 
162 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 And such 
 negative 
 determina- 
 tions arc 
 the Not- 
 Being, of 
 which we 
 have been 
 so long in 
 
 Therefore, 
 as Being 
 includes all 
 true deter- 
 minations 
 of thought, 
 Not-Being 
 is a kind of 
 Being. 
 
 ovcrla eo~Tiv, ovk evavTiov eKelvcp ayptalvovaa, aWa p. 258 
 toctovtov piovov, e\epov eKelvov. 
 
 GEAI. 1a(f)eaTaTa ye. 
 
 fiE. Tiv ovv avTrjv irpoaeLTToifiev ; 
 5 GEAI. Arjkov on to pr) ov, o Sia tov aocfjiarrju 
 i£r)TOVfJL€is, avro ecm tovto. 
 
 HE. UoTepov ovv, wairep ernes, eariv ovSevb? tcov 
 aXXwv ovaias eXXet7rop.evov, /cat Sel OappovvTa rjSr) 
 Xeyeiv otl to pnj bv /3e/3atW eo~Ti, tyjv avTOv (pvaiv 
 ioevoi/, cocnrep to p.eya y)v pieya /cat to kolaov iiv Kakov c 
 /cat to per) pceya *[p.r) pieya]* /cat to pur] KaXbv *[p.r) kcl- 
 Xov]*, ovtco 8e /cat to p.r/ bv /cara Tambv rjv re /cat 
 ecrTL pit) bv, evaptOpiov tcov 7roXXcov ovtcov elSo? ev ; 
 7] TLva eri irpb<s ai)To, co QeaiTijTe, airixTTvav e^opiev ; 
 H GEAI. Ovdepilav. 
 
 8. oicrias iXkeiirofievovJ ovcrias 
 is not exactly a genitive of re- 
 spect, but depends on eXXeiV. 
 in the same construction as 
 the second genitive in such 
 expressions as k\vco o-ov (pdivrji 
 — davnd£a> o~ov tt)s 8iavaias. 
 
 9. /3ei3aiW] " Incontrover- 
 tibly." 
 
 ecrri, ttjv] Edd. earl rrjv. 
 
 I have changed the accentua- 
 tion of io-rt, which does not 
 seem here to be merely an 
 auxiliary verb with ex ov - 
 
 11. Ka\ to fir] fj-eyaj The edi- 
 tors have followed Boeckh in 
 repeating /jltj /xeya and /at] ko\6v. 
 This is possibly right, but not 
 necessary, for the sense is 
 easily completed by supplying 
 tju } which is the emphatic word. 
 
 12. tjv re Kai eari] He passes 
 
 from the r\v of reference (" We 
 found it to be so") to that of 
 
 certainty (" It proves to be 
 so"), eo-ri is introduced as 
 more plainly contradicting 
 Parmenides. 
 
 13. ivapiOnov — ei8os ei>] Cf. 
 Parm. 160 c. 
 
 It is to be noticed here that 
 while the notion of Not-Being 
 is modified, there is a transi- 
 tion also in that of Being. 
 Through communion with Not- 
 Being, i. e. with the Other or 
 Difference, both in general and 
 particular, Being has become 
 concrete instead of merely ab- 
 stract, logical instead of purely 
 ideal. Being is the sum of 
 all positive existences, at the 
 same time having an existence 
 separate from them (Other 
 than their's). Socher observed 
 this, but had not perceived the 
 dialectical progress by which 
 this result is appi-oached. 
 
20<I>I2TH2. 
 
 163 
 
 258. SE. OlaO' ovv otl Ylapfxevibr) ptaKpoTe'pm T/79 
 airopp-qcrews rj7TLaTr}Kap.ev ; 
 0EAI. Ti8ri\ 
 
 £"E. YlXelov rj \elvos aTrehre aKOTreiv, rjpels els to 
 irpoaOev en ^yTijaavres 1 a.Tre8el^apev avTco. 
 GEAI. Um; 
 d 2?E. Otl 6 fiev irov (f)r]o-Lv, 
 
 ov yap fxr] 7Tore tovt iovSa/utji etvai fxr] eovra, 
 aWa <tv rrjcrS'' ct<j) 6Sov Sifycrios elpye voijixa. 
 
 0EAL Aeyet yap ovv ovto>?. 
 
 SE. 'HjueFy 8i ye ov \xovov ws earTi to. firj ovtcl 
 a7re8eLfja.iJ.ev, aAAct /cat to el8os b TvyyaveL bv tov per) 
 0VT09 a.7re(f)r)vdp,efla' ttjv yap OaTepov (f)vcriv a7ro8el- 
 IjavTe? ovaav re /cat KaTaKeKeppLaTLaptevrjv hfi iravTa 
 e to. ovTa Trpb? dXXrjXa, to Trpb? to ov eK.ao~Tov popLOv 
 avTrjs dvTLTL0ep.evov eToXfirjaapLev elirelv wy avTO 
 
 TOVTO eCTTLV OVTCO? TO fJLT} OV. 
 
 GEAI. Kcu TTavTairaai ye, co ije've, dXrjOeaTard 
 fiOL SoKodfiev elpijKevaL. 
 
 £E. M.7) TOIVVV rjpLOLS eLTTYj TLS OTL TOVVaVTLOV TOV 
 
 ■\Yt: have 
 lint, only 
 disobeyed 
 Parmeni- 
 
 des, but 
 have de- 
 fined the 
 Nature of 
 5 that which 
 he forbade 
 us to Dame. 
 Theessence 
 of Not- 
 Being is 
 the nega- 
 tive rela- 
 tion be- 
 tween each 
 existing 
 kind and 
 that which 
 is Other 
 than it. 
 
 1. ncutporepcos Trjs anopprjo-eas] 
 I. e. r) atrtinev fjpiv. 
 
 2. r]TVKTTrjKap,(v\ The use of 
 this word immediately after 
 airia-Tia, in a different sense, 
 deserves to be noted. "We 
 have carried onr disobedience 
 to Parmenides beyond the let- 
 ter of his prohibition." 
 
 8. fov8afij)-\-] I propose to 
 read touto <j>arj] here, as above, 
 p. 237 a, q. v. diCrjp-evos occurs 
 here also as a various reading, 
 but it does not seem impos- 
 sible that Plato should 
 
 to quote the words of Parme- 
 nides more exactly in one 
 place than in another. 
 
 14. KaTaKeKeppaTicrp,<;v7]v] Plato 
 
 is fond of this word. For a 
 parallel use, cf. Parm. 144 c. 
 
 15. to 7Tp6? dvTiTi8ep.evov~\ 
 
 Join to bv eKaarov, for which 
 cf Rep. 5? 480 : avTO eKacrrov to 
 ov. Cratyl. 389 C : els to epyov 
 eKao-Tov. Compare also ra>v 
 ovtcov eKao-Tov oXov in Theset. 
 
 174 a. 
 
 20. Mr} ovk ecrriv] " Let 110 
 
 man, then, say of us that we 
 
 2 
 
164 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 ovtos to fly ov (hrocjjaLvoLievoi ToXpcopev Xeyeiv coy p. 258 
 eaTiv. ypei? ydp nepi pev evavTiov tivos olvtw yai- 
 peiv iraXai Xeyopiev, eiT eanv e'/re per), Xoyov eypv rj 
 kou iravTcmao-iv dXoyov. o Se vvv eiprjKa/JLev elvai to p. 259 
 sprj ov, rj iretaaTw ti? a>? ov KaXcos Xeyopcev eXeyjkus, 
 ?; p-€XP L 7r€ P av ddvvaTr}, XeKTtov koli €K6iva> KaOairep 
 7]fid<s Xeyopcev, otl crvpp.iyvvTai re aAA?;Ao£9 to. yevrj 
 
 KOU TO T6 OV KOU 0a.T6pOV 8l(X TTOLVTWV KOU Si dXXt]- 
 
 Xcov SieXrjXvdoTa to p.ev eTepov peTaa^ov tov ovto? 
 
 10 eWtl ptev Sid TavT-qv ttjv fie'de^iv, ov pr)v £k.61v6 ye 
 
 ov LieTeayev dXK eTepov, eTepov Se tov ovtos ov, ecrTi 
 
 aa(f)eaTaTa ilj dvayKt]? elvai fir) ov' to 8e ov av 
 
 declare Not-Being the contrary 
 of Being, and dare to affirm 
 that it exists. We have long 
 ago shaken hands with the 
 question of an opposite to 
 being, whether one exists or 
 not, and whether this be 
 capable or wholly incapable of 
 definition. But for our pre- 
 sent account of Not-Being, let 
 a man either refute us and 
 persuade us that we are in 
 error, or, so long as he cannot, 
 he too must say as we say, 
 that there is an inter-commu- 
 nion of the kinds, and that 
 Being and Difference traverse 
 all things, and mutually inter- 
 penetrate, so that the other 
 partakes of being, and by rea- 
 son of such participation is, 
 yet is not that of which it 
 partakes, but an Other : and 
 being Other than Being, it is 
 clearly the case, of necessity, 
 that it is not-Being. While 
 Being, through partaking of 
 the Other, must be other tlian 
 the remaining kinds, and as 
 
 other than all, is not each one 
 of them, and is not all the rest, 
 but itself only ; so that there 
 are infinite cases in which 
 Being again is not, and in like 
 manner the remaining kinds, 
 whether taken severally or all 
 together, in many respects are, 
 and in many respects are not." 
 Cf. Legg. 10, 899 c: "H 818a- 
 ctk€LV r)pas rj tj/juv Treidecrdai. 
 
 Being is therefore distinguished 
 from the sum of positive de- 
 terminations. Compare the 
 attempt towards the close of 
 the Thesetetus to distinguish 
 the I8ea rrj9 (rv\\a(3rjs from the 
 
 2. nep\ fiev ivavrlov tlvos] 
 As often happens in sentences 
 begun with nep\, the syntax is 
 not quite exact. " As for an 
 opposite of Being, we have 
 long said good-bye to that in- 
 quiry."^ 
 
 II. e<TTL cra(pe<TTara e| avaynrjs 
 
 eii/at] These words are re- 
 peated from 256 d. to eTepov 
 is the subject of efocu, and (to 
 
2CXM2TH2. 
 
 259. Oarepov fi€T€iAr)(j)b? erepov toov aXXcov av ehj yevcov, 
 
 " erepov S" eKeivcov airavTCdv ov ovk eanv €koc(ttov 
 
 avTcov ov8e ^vpnravra ra aXXa ttXi]v olvto, ware to 
 
 bv avap<pio~(3r)T7]Too? av pcvpia errl pvpioi? ovk eo~Ti, 
 
 koll rdXXa 8rj KaO' eKaarov ovrco Kal ^vpnravra iroX- 
 
 Xaxf) P-ev ean, iroXXaxfj & ovk ecrTiv. 
 
 0EAI. 'AA^;. 
 
 HE. Kal ravTai? 8rj rah evavTicocreaiv elre anri- 
 
 0~T6L TI?, CTKeTTTeOV aVTW KOL XtKTtOV filXTLOV TL TCOV 
 
 c vvv elprjpevcov' eire to? ti yaXeirbv KaTavevorjKco? 
 
 ypipSl TOTE p.€V €7T£ OoLTtpa T0T6 8' €7Ti Oarepa TOVS 
 
 Xoyov? eXKcov, ovk a^ia ttoAAt;? cnrov8rjs laiT0v8a- 
 Kev, coy ol vvv Xoyoc (pacri. tovto pcev yap ov re ti 
 ko/ulxJ/ov ovre \aXeirov evpeiv, eKeivo 8' r)8r) Kal ^aXe- 
 ttov apa Kal KaXov. 
 
 0EAI. To ttoIov ; 
 
 HE. *0 Kal irpoaOev e'lpTjTat, to Tama edcravTa 
 &>? "j~oWara~j~ tols Xeyopevoi? olov t elvai Ka6' eKaaTov 
 
 Our argu- 
 ment has 
 shewn the 
 worthless- 
 
 IQ nessof that 
 easy and 
 childish 
 logic which 
 relies on 
 the expo- 
 sure of con- 
 tradictions, 
 when com- 
 pared with 
 
 1 5 that which 
 is at once 
 difficult 
 and valu- 
 able, the 
 real criti- 
 cism of 
 
 erepov) etvai pr) ov of eo-Tiv. The 
 Words erepov rov ovros ov are ill 
 
 agreement with rb erepov. 
 
 8. Kal — (pao-i] " If this ap- 
 parent contradiction awaken 
 doubt, let doubt lead to in- 
 quiry. But if made the occa- 
 sion of logomachy by men who 
 delight in working out and 
 bringing into relief the oppo- 
 site sides of such antinomies, let 
 such men learn from the above 
 argument that it is childish to 
 mistake the different for the 
 incompatible." Mr. Grote ob- 
 serves that this would be no 
 unfair description of Plato's 
 own procedure in the Parme- 
 nides. To which it may be 
 rejoined that, as Mr. Grote 
 
 himself points out, the diffi- 
 culties of the Parmenides are 
 regarded by their author as a 
 preparatory exercise, stimu- 
 lating the mind to further 
 study, whereas in the case 
 here supposed the difficulties 
 are raised for their own sake. 
 II. rovs Xoyovs I'Xkcoi/] The 
 picture of men tearing an 
 argument "to tatters, to very 
 rags," is one which frequently 
 occurs. Cf. Phileb. 57 d : rots 
 
 deivols Tvep\ \6ya>v 6\kj]V. 
 
 14. »cai ^akenov apa <a\ KaAoV] 
 According to Plato's favourite 
 proverb, on xa\f7ra Ta KaXd. 
 
 18. us f§vvard\] Either "as 
 easily managed" (cf. ov xa^enbv 
 supra,), or "as possible to be" 
 
166 
 
 nAATONo: 
 
 arguments 
 according 
 
 to their 
 genuine 
 
 meaning. 
 That ana- 
 lysis which 
 makes ab- 
 solute se- 
 verance 
 between 
 different 
 forms is at 
 the oppo- 
 site pole 
 from true 
 philosophy: 
 for without 
 
 eXeyyovT eiraKoXovOelv, otolv re ti? eTepov ov 7rrj p. 259 p. 
 tolvtov elvai (f)y kol otolv tolvtov ov eTepov, eKelvt] d 
 
 KCLL KOLT eK€lVO O (j)7]0~L TOVTCOV TTeTTOvOeVOLl 7TOTepOV, TO 
 
 Se tolvtov eTepov dirofyaiveiv ufirj ye 7rr) kou to 6ol- 
 5 Tepov tolvtov kou to fxeya a/iiKpov kol to o/jlolov 
 
 olvo/jlolov, kou yaipeiv ovtco TOLvavTia del irpofapovTa 
 
 ev T0I9 \6yoLS, ov Te tls ekey^os ovto? dhrjOivb? 
 
 dpTL Te tcov ovtcov tlvos e<pa7TTO/j.evov St]\os veoye- 
 
 vrj9 d)V. 
 10 GEAI. Ko/juSfj fxev ovv. 
 
 — the latter is more probable. 
 " Letting these contradictions 
 alone, as not inconsistent Avith 
 the nature of things." (ovk 
 dBCuara, Par. F. marg.) In sup- 
 port of the former (which, 
 however, is hardly Greek), cf. 
 Phileb. 14 d : pr/ Seii> tcov tol- 
 ovtcov aTTTeaflat, nat8apico8rj Kal 
 pa8ta Kal acpodpa rots Xoyois ip- 
 7r68ia. The word is suspici- 
 ous, and Badham conj. dvrjWTa. 
 It is more likely that a few 
 letters have dropt out, e. g. 
 ravra idaavra cos 8vvar ov pd- 
 \10-T\a. 
 
 (18.) olov t etvai — 7r6repov] 
 " To be able to apply his rea- 
 son to each particular point in 
 a discussion, and to bring any 
 man to the test who says that 
 what is other in some respect 
 is the same, or what is the 
 same is other, by reasoning 
 with him on that ground and 
 of that particular relation, in 
 which he says that either of 
 these predicates is applicable." 
 
 I. iXeyxovra irraKoXovdelvj Cf. 
 
 Rep. 7> 534 c: ^>°" 7Te p * v H-^xn $ ia 
 
 iravrcov iXey^cov 8ie£iu>v — iv 7ruai 
 tovtols dnrcoTi tco Xoyco 8t,cnro- 
 ptvrjTai. 
 
 3. tear ineivo o = k. e. Ka6' 6] 
 
 The want of this power is 
 again noted as the defect of 
 dvTikoyiKT) in Piep. 5, 454 c. 
 
 This passage has been curi- 
 ously mistranslated by Hegel : 
 Geschichte der Phil. p. 210. 
 See Introduction to Sophist, 
 sub finem. 
 
 7. ov re tis veoyevTjS cov~\ 
 
 " This is no real exercise of 
 reason, but on the face of it 
 the childish offspring of one 
 who has but a recent ac- 
 quaintance with the true ob- 
 jects of thought." Cf. Rep. 7, 
 539 b : ol peipaKio-KOi, orav to 
 7rpa>rov Xoycov yevcovTai, cos 7rai8ia 
 avTols Karaxpcovrai, del els dvTi- 
 Xoy'iav xpco/xepot, Kal pipovpevoi 
 tovs i£eXey%ovTas avrol aXXovs 
 i£eXeyxovcn, ^a/poi/rer cocnrep ctkv- 
 XaKia tco eXicew re Kal tTTrapdrreiv 
 rbv ttXi]ctiov aet. 
 
 8. veoyevrjs] Cf. Theset. 160 
 e : tovto (pcopev crbv eivai olov 
 veoyeves Tral8iov. Perhaps veo- 
 
 yevrjs has here the meaning 
 (which Hegel gives it) = viov 
 yivvr]p.a. (Cf. Shakspeare's 
 " the baby of a girl.") See 
 the unusual meaning given to 
 vvpcptVTrjs in Polit. 268 a. 
 
scxmsths. 
 
 167 
 
 259. 37E. K a i yap, <*> 'ya6e, to ye irav goto iravro? "commu : 
 hri")(6Lpelv airoyodpLiJEiv aXXcos re ovk tufieXe? /ecu 8r) kinds" 
 e kcu iravTairaaLv dfj-ovaov tivos kcu d(hiXoao(f)ou. be no dis- 
 
 „ , , course. 
 
 0EAI. Tt 8y ; 
 
 HE. TeXecoTaTr) irdvTcav Xoycov lariv dfyaviais to 5 
 8ia\v€t,v eKaarou goto ttolvtcdv' Sid yap tyjv dXXiiXcou 
 twv elbwv arvpirXoKi]v 6 Aoyo? yeyovev 7)\uv. 
 
 0EAI. 'AXrflri. 
 
 360. 3*E. 2/C07T€i TOLVVV GO? €V KOLipW VVV 8rj TOl? TOl- 
 
 ovtol? Sie/jLaxofxeOa kcu irpocnqvayKaipixev kav erepov 10 
 irepco fuyvvcrOaL. 
 
 0EAI. Upos 8r) ti; n d 
 
 SE. IlpO? TO TOP XoyOV rjfJUV TWV OVT(£)V €V Tl And at the 
 „<y /\ /\\/ present 
 
 yevQiv eivcu. toutov yap crTeprj6ei/T€9 to p.tv P*yi- juncture 
 
 2. inixeipe'iv] " To go about 
 to separate." The word is 
 redundant, as often in Plato : 
 e. g. supra 235 e. Phaedr. 
 265 e. 
 
 3. d/iova-ov twos] Because 
 fiovaiKfj is conversant with Xo'- 
 yoi. Cf. Theset. 156 a. 
 
 5. TeXecoraTT) — irdvTcav] This 
 
 truth is the key to the present 
 dialogue, and gives unity to what 
 seems unconnected. The chief 
 characteristic of the Sophist is 
 avrikoyiKT], an art of negation 5 
 and even the Elenchus, as pro- 
 fessed by him, has the defect 
 of being purely negative, and 
 is valuable only in clearing the 
 way for positive speculation. 
 It is by means of this contro- 
 versial or negative dialectic 
 that the Sophist eludes us 
 when we try to fix upon him 
 the reproach of being a pre- 
 tender. And Parmenides has 
 given occasion for this kind of 
 
 reasoning, by drawing the line 
 so sharply between being and 
 not-being. Of the same nature 
 was the difficulty we encoun- 
 tered in considering the ex- 
 clusive antithesis of rest and 
 motion. This whole class of 
 difficulties is solved when we 
 perceive that positive and ne- 
 gative are indissolubly united 
 in the nature of things : and 
 in particular we are enabled to 
 transfix the Sophist by proving 
 to him that negation is applic- 
 able to thought and speech. 
 
 9. rots toiovtois\ Sc. rots 
 fir]8ev e<DO~iv Koivaviq ira6r]jxaTos 
 erepov ddrepov Trpoaayopeveiv, 
 
 p. 252 c. f 
 
 14. tovtov yap arepq&Vrer] 
 
 " For if compelled to relinquish 
 this, the greatest evil would be 
 that we must give up philo- 
 sophy ; but besides this, at 
 this moment we are required 
 to agree upon a definition of 
 
168 
 
 IIAATQNQ2 
 
 conveni- 
 ence of 
 
 l).i\ ing es- 
 tablished 
 this com- 
 munion, for 
 our next 
 business 
 is to define 
 Discourse, 
 whereas if 
 forms were 
 incommu- 
 nicable, we 
 should not 
 have been 
 able to 
 discourse 
 at all. 
 The reason 
 why this 
 is neces- 
 sary is that 
 the Sophist 
 has yet an- 
 other hold 
 on us. He 
 may assert 
 that Not- 
 Being can- 
 not enter 
 into Dis- 
 course. 
 
 arov (f)iAo(To(pias av aTepi]0eipev, eri 8" ev tco ttol- p. z6c 
 povn del Xoyov rjpa? Siop.oXoyi)aaa6aL tl ttot ecrTLV, 
 el Se d(j)r)pefli]p,ev ai)To pc^S" elvaL to Trapdirav, ovSev 
 av en nov XeyeLV oloi T rjp.ev. d(()yjpedr]pev 6" av, 
 5 el avvey^oprjaapev p.i]8ep.lav eivai ji'l^lv p.r)8evl irpos h 
 pr)8e'v. 
 
 0EAI. 'Opdat? tovto ye. Xoyov Se 8l 6 tl vvv 
 SiopLoXoyi]Te'ov ovk epaOov. 
 
 mE. AAA \o~co9 TyS" eiropievos paorr av p.a6oi$. 
 
 to geai. n^ ; 
 
 SE. To pcev Sr) pr) bv rjpuv ev tl twv aXXcov yevos 
 bv ave(pdvr), /caret irdvTa to. ovTa Stecnrappevov. 
 
 0EAI. Ovrm. 
 
 /H*E. Ovkovv to p.eTa tovto crKeTTTeov el So^rj re 
 15/cai Xoycp ptlyvvTaL. 
 
 GEAI. T/&J; 
 
 SE. M?) p.Lyvvp.evov p.ev avTov tovtols avayKaiov 
 aXrjOrj ttclvt elvaL, pLLyvvp.evov Se Sotja re \J/evSr)$ c 
 yiyveTaL /cat Aoyos" to yap to. pr) ovTa So{jd(JELV r) 
 10 XeyeLV, tovt eo~TL ttov to \j/evSo?, ev SLavola re koi 
 \oyoL$ yLyvop.evov. 
 
 GEAI. Ovtcos. 
 
 HE. "O^roy Se ye yj/evSov? eaTLv cmaTr}, 
 
 Discourse, whereas, if the very 
 existence of discourse were 
 utterly taken from us, I pre- 
 sume we could not then dis- 
 course at all" (much less dis- 
 course upon Discourse). 
 
 11. To \x.ev 8rj — av«$)avrj\ Viz. 
 
 The application of the notion 
 of Other to those things from 
 which Being, or any part of 
 Being, is distinguished. 
 
 12. diecnrapfjLtvov] Supr. 255 
 
 e, 257 c. 
 
 14. el — ulyvvrm] The way 
 is now prepared for the con- 
 tinuation of the argument 
 which was dropped p. 236 e. 
 
 18. 86ga re \j/ev$i)<; ylyverai kcl\ 
 
 Xdyoy] See, in addition to 
 passages elsewhere cited, Cra- 
 tyl. 385-387. 4 2 9> 436- 
 
 20, ev diavoia — yiyvop.evov~\ 
 " Which thus arises in the re- 
 gion of thought and speech." 
 
20cM2TH2. 169 
 
 200. 0EAI. Nat. In other 
 i— i \ y f r t words : 
 AE. Kal p-nv airarm ovcrm el8coXcov re Kal eiKO- Negation 
 
 ^ct)v 77<5?7 kcu (havTacrlas 1 navTa avayKi] fieara eivai. but False- 
 
 ^^ „ N v hood is nut. 
 
 0EAI. llco? yap ov ; 
 
 AE. To^ 8e cro(pi(TTrju e<papev ev rourft) irov rw5 
 d ro7Ttt> KOLTairefevyevcu pev, efjapvov 8e yeyovevai to 
 ivapairav prfi eivai \j/ev8o9' to yap prj bv ovt€ 8ia- 
 voelaOai Ttva ovte Xey&v' ovaia? yap ov8ev ovdapfj 
 
 TO prj OV fieT€)(€ll/. 
 
 0EAI. 3 Hv Tama. IO 
 
 SE. Nvv 8e ye tovto pev etydvrj peTeyov tov ovtos, 
 dxrre TavTrj pev torcos ovk av pd\oiTO en' Taya 8' av 
 (f)alr} tqjv el8cov to. pev peTeyeiv tov prj ovtos, to. 8' 
 ov, Kal Xoyov 8rj real 8o£av eivai tcov ov peTeyovTcov. 
 (00-T6 tt]v el8coXo7rouKrjv Kal (paPTaaTLKTjv, ev f] (f)apev 15 
 e avTov eivai, 8iapd\oiT av iraXiv d>9 TravTairacriv ovk 
 eaTiv, e7rei8r) 86^a Kal Xoyos ov Koivoovei tov prj ov- 
 tos' ^ev8o9 yap to irapanrav ovk eivai TavT7]s prj 
 crvvio-Tapevris tyjs Koivwvias. 81a tovt ovv Xoyov Hence 
 
 v *'f- v Jl ' £ r r, , there arises 
 
 TrpcoTov Kai oo^av Kai (pavTacriav oiepevvr]Teov o tl 20 the neces- 
 
 > v ?i , r v \ / j r, sity of ex- 
 
 7T0T eCTTLV, LVa (paveVTCOV Kai Tl)v KOLVCOViaV aVTCOV amining 
 
 „s- . « x 3/ /j, 5,/ (nv \ 1 ^^ ,\ speech, 
 
 201. T(p pi] OVTl KaTlOCOpeV, KaTlOOVTeS Oe TO "^revOO? OV opinion, 
 
 3. ndvra — fieara eivai] Cf. communion is said to unite, 
 
 Thepet. 170 c: ml ivavra tvov instead of the elements unit- 
 
 Hea-ra ravOpcoTviva fyrovvrwv 81- ing in communion, just as 9 
 
 dao-Kcikovs re Kal cipxovras avrmv P-axV ovvivTarai is put for oi 
 
 K.r.X. Crat. 411 C. paxop.evoi o-vvlaravrai els fiaxqv. 
 
 6. egapvov be yeyovevai] pp. 20. 8d|ai> Kal cpavrao-iav] This 
 
 239-241. distinction is in advance of the 
 
 1 5. (pavTaa-TiKTjv] Distinguish- psychology of the Theretetus. 
 
 ed from elicao-TiKr), the Other 21. "iva KaTidapev] " That 
 
 species of eldcoXonouKTi, supr. when we have found them, we 
 
 p. 236 c. may. also observe their com- 
 
 16. irakiv] I. e. As before in munion with Not-Being." 
 the case of p.f] ov. 22. to yj/evSos bv] "That 
 
 18. p.f] o-wio-rapev-qs] The falsehood exists." 
 
170 
 
 riAATONOS 
 
 and imagi- 
 nation, that 
 we may see 
 whether 
 or no they 
 partake of 
 Not-Being. 
 The So- 
 phist ap- 
 pears likely 
 to prove 
 a very 
 Sphinx, 
 proposing 
 to us one 
 riddle after 
 another. 
 But we 
 must not 
 lose heart ; 
 and, after 
 all, his 
 chief for- 
 tress is 
 already 
 taken. 
 
 diro8ei£ > tt)pev, diro8ei^avTes 8e tov cro(])iarTr)v eh avTo p. 261 1 
 €v8i]cra)fiei> i etirep evo\o9 eanu, rj /cat diroXvaavTes ev 
 aXXco yevei {rjrcopev. 
 
 0EAI. KofuSf) 8e ye, a> £e've, eoiKev dXrjOe? eivai 
 
 5 to 7repi tov ao(f)iaTi]v /car dpyas XeyOev, on 8vo~0r}- 
 pevTOv eirj to yevos. (pa'tverou yap ovv 7rpofiXr)paT0JV 
 yep.eiv, &v e7ret8dv n 7rpo(3aXr), tovto wpoTepov dva- 
 yKoiov 8iapdyeo~6ai nplv eV avTOv ifcelvov d(f)iKecr6ca. 
 vvv yap poyis pcev to pr) ov coy ovk ecrTi 7rpo(3Xr)0ev 
 
 10 8ieirepdo-ap.ev, erepov 8e 7rpo(3e'(3Xr)Tai, /cat <5et 8rj \jsev- b 
 809 coy eo~TL /cat ire pi Xoyov /cat irepl 8ofjav a7ro5et£at, 
 /cat /MeTa tovto tcrcoy erepov, /cat er aAAo per eKelvo' 
 Kai nepas, coy eot/cez/, ov8ev tyavrjcreTai noTe. 
 
 212. Qappelv, cb QeaiTr)T€, %prj tov /cat crpLKpbv tl 
 
 15 8vvap.evov eh to irpocrOev del irpoievai. n yap o y' 
 d6vp.wv ev tovtols 8paaeuev dv ev aAAoty, rj p.r)8ev ev 
 e/cetVoty dvvTcov rj /cat irdXiv els TOviriuOev diratcrOeh ; 
 o-)(oXfi 7Tov, to /caret tyjv irapoiplav Xeyop,evov, o ye 
 
 1. civto] to y^evbos. 
 
 2. etVep evoxos i<TTiv~\ " If he 
 
 is liable to be beld therein." 
 The word, without losing the 
 legal association, recovers the 
 original metaphorical sense. 
 Cf. irpoxeipov, Theset. 198 d, 
 and note. The same remark 
 applies to aTrokio-avres, " freeing 
 him" (at once acquitting and 
 liberating). 
 
 5. kclt dpxas] 218 c, 223 b, 
 226 a. 
 
 6. Trpof$\r)ixa.T(>>v yepeiv] Cf. 
 
 Theset. 161 a : o'Ui p,e \6ycou 
 riva eivai 6v\clkov kcu padicos 
 e£e\6i>Ta ipeiv cos ovk av e'^ft 
 ovT<a ravra. 
 
 7. TrpofidXr)] Referring to 
 ■n-pofikrjpdToiv, which partly re- 
 
 tains the etymological sense. 
 TtpofiaKkeiv is here to throw in 
 front as a screen or defence. 
 Cf. Polit. 279 d. 
 
 8. 8iapaxeo~6ai\ " To fight 
 through." dia retaining the 
 original meaning. 
 
 10. 7rpo[3e[3\T]Tai] The perf. 
 pass, is perhaps used here with 
 middle signification, = " has 
 thrown before him ;" but the 
 word is more probably to be 
 taken passively: = "Another 
 problem is set." 
 
 12. 'i<rws erepov\ Sc. 8(rj(rei 
 Tvpof$\rj8ev dimrepacrai. 
 
 1 6. ev tovtois\ DC. ev ois irpo- 
 eiatv. 
 
 iv eKeivois] Sc. toIs aWois. 
 
20<M2TH2. 
 
 171 
 
 26 1. toiovtos av 7T0TC eXoi ttoXlv. vvv ft eirel, u> 'ya6e, 
 c tovto o Aeyet? foaireirepavTcu, to tol peyiaTov rjpuv 
 Ttlyps r/prj/ievov av etrj, tol 8" dXXa ySr] paa> kcu 
 a/jLiKporepa. 
 
 0EAI. KaAcoy ei7rey. 5 
 
 2E. Aoyov 8r) irpojTOV koll Soijav, KaOdirep ipprjdt] 
 vvv 8r}, Xd(3cop.€v, tv evapyearepov *d.7roXoyLO-(op.€@a*, 
 TTorepov avTcov (mrerai to p.r) bv rj TravTairacriv 
 dXrjdrj fiev io~TLV dp.(j)6r€pa ravTa, yj/evdos 1 Se ovSe- 
 7T0T€ ovderepov. IO 
 
 0EAI. 'Op6m. 
 d S'E. <$>epe 8r), KaOdirep hri tcov eldcov Kcti tcov Our first 
 ypap/xarcov eXeyopcev, wepl tcov ovo/xarcov ttoXlv be to ask 
 
 (/",./ , z / / * n e same 
 
 coaavTcos tTrLLTKeylrcopeOa. (paLverai yap tttj ravTrj question 
 
 \ « >. / ' about 
 
 TO VVV (rjTOVfXeVOV. 15 words 
 
 v - ^ v v „ , e which we 
 
 UEA1. lo 7TOLOV ovv or) irept rcov ovoparcov vira- have ai- 
 
 f ready an- 
 
 KOVCrreOV ; swered 
 
 v*tt< T7"/ ' > \ n ' \ y ' *> about the 
 
 2E. Eire iravra aXXyXois ZjvvappoTTeL eire per)- letters of 
 
 <n/ y \ \ »/i/-y v rv / the alpha- 
 
 0€V eire ra pev WeXei, ra Oe p.r). bet and the 
 
 0EAI. ArjXov tovto ye, otl to. /xev iOeXei, tol <$' ov. 20 5^*? 
 
 3. fiprjixevov] This use of the 
 pf. pass, of alpeoa sufficiently 
 confirms the MS. reading rjprj- 
 <r8ac in Phileb. 66 b. The 
 metaphor is suggested by 
 axoXfj — eXoi ivokiv above. 
 
 7. vvv 8rj] So also the Bodl. 
 MS. (not 8e). 
 
 *a7roXoyio-o>jite#a*] MSS. a7ro- 
 
 \oyr)(Tcop.e6a. If the MS. read- 
 ing were right, the following 
 clauses would depend on Xd/3co- 
 fiev, and there would be a con- 
 tinuation of the metaphor from 
 supr. 254 d : ddcpois aVaXXdr- 
 retv. Cf. Legg. 10, 886 e. But 
 the correction of Heindorf, 
 
 received by Bekker and suc- 
 ceeding editors, appears so 
 exactly suited to the context, 
 that it is here retained. " That 
 we may reckon or infer more 
 clearly." " That we may have 
 better data for determining." 
 diro as in dndKa^eiv, dnopavrev- 
 ecrdat. 
 
 14. Cpaiverai yap ittj TavTy] 
 
 Because words are the ele- 
 ments of speech, as letters 
 are of syllables, and ideas of 
 thought. 
 
 l6. T6 77010V VnaKOV(TT€Ov\ 
 
 " What question must I an- 
 swer about names?" 
 
 z z 
 
172 
 
 riAATONOS 
 
 To what 
 
 extent « 1 ■ » 
 thej admit 
 ofcombina- 
 
 1 1 • HI ' 
 
 Scmif com- 
 binations 
 of words 
 are signifi- 
 cant, and 
 some are 
 not. 
 For, as 
 there are 
 two chief 
 parts of 
 speech : 
 the verb, 
 which sig- 
 nifies ac- 
 tion, and 
 the noun, 
 which de- 
 notes the 
 agent, 
 neither 
 verbs with- 
 out nouns 
 nor nouns 
 without 
 verbs can 
 be strung 
 together so 
 as to mean 
 anything. 
 
 SE. To TOiovfte XeytLS tcrcos, otl to. plv ifa^rjs p. 261. 
 Xeyo/iepa koll 8r)XovvTa tl tjvvapfioTrei, to. 8e rfj e 
 avve^eia pifiev aifixaivovTa uvapfioaTtL 
 
 0EAI. Ylcos tl tout wires ; 
 5 £?E. Oirep wi]6r)v viroXafiovra ere 7rpoaopoXo- 
 yelv. ecrTL yap rj/xip irov tcou ttj (poavrj 7repl rrjv ov- 
 er lav S^Xcofxarcof Slttop yevos. 
 
 0EAI. IlcSff; 
 
 SE. To fiku ovofiara, to Se pr]p.ara kXtjOIv. p. 26a. 
 
 to 0EAI. Et7re eKorepov. 
 
 3E. To fiev eVt tolls Trpd^ecrLV ov 8rjXcop.a pr)p,d 
 7rov Xeyofiev. 
 
 0EAI. Nai. 
 
 HE. To Se y eV au rots' tKeiva irpaTTOvcn arj- 
 15 pelov Trjs (j)covf}s tTTLTeOev ovofm. 
 
 0EAI. KopLlSfj flCP OVV. 
 
 SE. Ovkovv e£ ovopLccTcov i±ev fiopcop arvve)(css 
 Xeyofievutv ovk kern iroTe Xoyos, ovS' av prjpLaTcov 
 ■^copls 6po/jl(ztoc>i> Xey6evT(ov. 
 20 0EAI. TavT ovk e/iaOop. 
 
 HE. ArjXou yap cos Trpos erepop tl (SXeiraov apTi b 
 
 9. To /iei> ovopara, to Se P77- 
 
 /xara kXij&V] The distinction 
 of noun and verb is here in- 
 troduced as something wholly- 
 new. Note that ovopa is used 
 first in a generic and after- 
 wards in a specific meaning : 
 first for " word" (supr. d) and 
 then for " noun." 
 
 II. To pev — ovopa] " The 
 one, which is an expression 
 standing for actions, Ave call a 
 verb : the other, which is an ar- 
 ticulate mark set on those who 
 do the actions, we call a noun." 
 
 14. i K eiva] The Bodl. MS. 
 
 has eKeivas (sc. ras irpd^eis). 
 
 18. prjudrcov] The genitive 
 is governed by e'£ in the pre- 
 ceding line. 
 
 2 1. ArjXov yap] " ToU must 
 
 surely have had something 
 different in your eye when you 
 agreed with me. For this is 
 the very thing I meant in say- 
 ing that these things (nouns 
 or verbs) merely strung to- 
 gether in this way do not 
 make language." 
 
20*I2TH2. 173 
 
 362. ^vvcofxoXoyeLS' eVei tout olvto i/3ovXo/jLr)i> enreiv, otl 
 (rvveycos co8e Xeyo/xeva ravra ovk eari Xoyos. 
 
 GEAI. Ife; 
 
 HE. Oiov, fiaSiteL rpeyei KaOevSei, koll rdXXa 6<ra 
 7rpd£ei9 (jrjfAalvei prjpara, kc\v irdvra tis i(f)e£r]9 olvt 5 
 €'i7rr), Xoyov ovSev tl fiaXXov air epydtjzTai. 
 
 GEAI. Um yap ; 
 
 2E. Ovkovv Kcu ttolXlv otclv Xtyrjrou, Xea>v e'Xa- The most 
 
 r/ r/ ,/ „ \ ,y 9 elementary 
 
 <pO? L7T7T09, OCTCt T€ OVO/JLOLTa TCOU TOLS 7rpafJ€l? (XV sentence 
 , , , n v v / <s \ \ must con- 
 
 c irpaTTOvTwv coi>OLiao~Vr), koli Kara ravrrju or) rr)v 10 tain at 
 
 / '(>/ /-' n ' » ^ ' x least one 
 
 avve^eiav ovoei? irco ^vvearr] Xoyos' ovoe/xiau yap ofeach 
 
 v tf v » > / - y- > o.» > w > c> \ kind. And 
 
 oure ovtcos ovr eKeivcos irpa^cv ovo airpa^tav ovoe the sim- 
 
 >/ v »pn\ \ 3/ ?> \ ~ ^ j /i/ plest com- 
 
 ovaiav ovtos ovoe fir) ovtos oyXoi. ra (pcovrjdevTa, binationof 
 
 vv r> » / v <• / / /a noun and 
 
 ivpiv av tis tols ovopaai ra pr/iiaTa Kepaay tote ver b ) ^^ 
 5' rjp/iioore re Ka\ Xoyos eyevero evOvs r) Trpcorr) o~v\x- 15 ^arns,"^ 
 TrXoKr), a^eSbv tcov Xoycov 6 wpcoTos kcu o-pUKpo- ^sSSb^ 
 
 rai 09. 
 
 2. ravra] Sc. ovofiara nai rjppaae re Kal — iyeveroj For 
 
 pTjjiiara. the aorists cf. Theset. 156 e, 
 
 5. avr] So the Bodl. MS., and note. And for the whole 
 with An. cett. avr. expression, cf. Phileb.47d: pigu 
 
 6. aTrepyd£erai\ The subject pia Xvtttjs re Kai rjdovrjs ^vpninTei 
 is not tis, but Ta prjpaTa. yevopevr], 
 
 9. ovopara — a>vopao-drj\ Here 17 irpcaTT] <Tvp.7r\oicff\ li The 
 
 also the cogn. accus. becomes simplest combination." In 
 
 the nominative to the passive Theyet. 202 it was suggested 
 
 verb. that words taken singly had 
 
 10. Kal Kara rai/Trjv — Xdyos] no signification, but only when 
 " No sentence is constructed combined. Here the condi- 
 by this concatenation any more tions necessary to this combi- 
 that by the former one." nation are further shewn. It 
 
 1 3. oicriav — prj ovtos] It has seems to be implied here that 
 
 been above shewn that this is falsity is only in propositions, 
 
 the meaning of every negative to yjsevSos iv o-wdio-ei d«, as 
 
 proposition. Aristotle says (de An. III. 6, 
 
 15. rjppoo-t] Sc. tcl (pavTjdevTa, § 2). This was not seen in 
 
 " The elements of speech com- Crat. 385 d : "Eanv apa ovopa 
 
 bine." The verb is used in a ^evbos kol d\r)6es Xiyew, e'lnep 
 
 neuter sense, as below. ko,\ \6yov. 
 
 and this 
 
174 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 may be 
 taken as a 
 type of lan- 
 guage in 
 
 tin- most 
 rudimen- 
 tary form. 
 
 It is there- 
 fore true 
 that of 
 words, as 
 of letters 
 and sounds, 
 only cer- 
 tain com- 
 binations 
 are admis- 
 sible. 
 
 Every such 
 combina- 
 tion is a 
 proposi- 
 tion. 
 
 Moreover, 
 every 
 proposi- 
 tion, even 
 the sim- 
 plest, has 
 a subject, 
 and is of a 
 certain 
 quality. 
 
 GEAI. ricoy ap code Xeyeis ; p. 262 p, 
 
 SE. "Otolv 6*7777 tls avdptoiros pavOdvei, Xoyov 
 eivou (j)rj? tovtov iXayicnov re koll irpwrov ; 
 
 GEAI. "Eycoye. d 
 
 5 HE. A?;Aor yap rj8t] irov Tore irepl tcov ovtwv tj 
 yiyvopevcov 77 yeyovorcov ?; peXXovrcov, kou ovk ovo- 
 pd^ei povov, aXXd tl irepaiveL, avpwXeKCDV rd prjpara 
 rots bvopaai. 8lo Xeyeiv re avTov dXX' ov povov ovo- 
 pd{J£iv earopev, kou 8r) kou to> irXeypari tovtco to 
 loovopa i<p$eytjdpe0a Xoyov. 
 
 0EAI. 'Op0m. 
 
 HE. Qvtco 8rj KaOdirep rd irpdypara rd plv dX- 
 XyXois rjppoTTe, rd 6"' ov, kou 7repl rd tt}? (frcovrj? av 
 arjpe'ia rd pev oi>x dpporrei, rd 8e appbrrovra avTcov e 
 15 Xoyov direipydcraTO. 
 
 0EAI. Yiavrdiracri pev ovv. 
 
 HE. "Ktl 8rj apLKpov To8e. 
 
 GEAI. To irolov ; 
 
 HE. Aoyov dvayKcuov, otclv irep fj, tlvos elvcu 
 2oXoyov, prj 8e tlvos dSvvarov. 
 
 GEAI. Ovrm. 
 
 HE. Ox 
 
 kou 7T0L0V TLva avrov elvcu 8el ; 
 
 1. 2>oV] The adverb is used, 
 instead of tovto, by a sort of 
 attraction from n&s. 
 
 7- aXkd ti ire palvei] " But 
 effects or determines some- 
 thing." Cf. Theeet. 180 a : ne- 
 
 paveis 8e ov8e Trore ov8ev irpbs 
 ov8eva avrcov. 
 
 9. t<5 TrXeypan] The same 
 metaphor is applied in the 
 Politicus to the practical com- 
 binations of the Statesman. 
 
 13. ra ttjs cpavrjs o-rjpela] "The 
 
 vocal marks on things," i. e. 
 
 words. 7rep\ = " in the region 
 of," i. e. " amongst." 
 
 17. apiKpov rode] Sc. 'i8a>p.ev or 
 \dfia>p.ev. Cf. Polit. 300 a : tl 
 8e To8e ; Compare the similar 
 ellipse with h8e in Thetet. 191c: 
 a\X S>8e. 
 
 1 9. twos ehai Xo'yoi'] " Must 
 
 have a subject." Cf. Theast. 
 
 160 a : 'AvdyKT] 8e ye ipi re Tivbs 
 yiyvecrOai, orav aladavopevos yi- 
 yvcopai. ala6avopevov yap, pr]8evbs 
 8e alaOavopevop d8vva.Tovyiyvea6ai' 
 eKelvo re tiv\ ylyveudai k.t.A. 
 
20<I>I2TH2. 175 
 
 26 3 . 0EAI. ITwy <$' ov; 
 
 aE. Ilpoae^copeu Si] rov vovv r)puv avrois. 
 
 9EAI. Aei yovv. 
 
 SE. Ae'Ao rolvvv aoi Xoyov, avvOeis Tvpfiypa For exam- 
 
 , , , \ t/ cv> * ' ' ple:"The- 
 
 7Tpa^€L 01 OVOflOLTOS KOLL prjpKXTOS' OTOV O U.V O XoyOS 5 aetetusis 
 
 ■? / , /<> sitting" is 
 
 fj, (TV fJLOL (ppaQzlV. aproposi- 
 
 3 ^3* 0EAI. ToLVT 6OT0U Kara Svvap.IV. which The- 
 
 SE. Qeairrjro? Kadrjrai. picov per) piaKpo? 6 Aoyoy; the subject. 
 GEAI. Oi)/c, ctAAa pceTpios. 
 
 SE. 2ov e/3yoj> 5?) (ppd^eiv 7vepl ov r earl kou io 
 orou. 
 
 0EAI. A^Aoi^ OTl 7T€pl €/JLOV T€ KOLL €/XOS\ 
 
 GEAI. IMos-; 
 
 £?E. QeairrjTos, w vvv eyco SiaXeyopiai, wererou. i5"Thefete- 
 
 0EAI. Kat tovtov ovS av eh aXXa>s envoi 7vXr)v flying," is 
 
 j / » ■? v \ » another, of 
 
 ep.ov t eivai koll Tvepi eptov. which the 
 
 VT? FT N £ ' ' 'A. ' " subject is 
 
 Ah., Ho^of oe ye tivcl (papiev uvaytaxiov eKaorrov the same. 
 
 9 .. f But they 
 
 eiVOLl TCOV XoyCOV. differ in 
 
 b GEAI. NaL -Foft&one 
 
 •—it? T'' fii> «' f ' J. ' 9 is mani- 
 
 Ar*. Lovtcov or) woiov riva eKarepov (pareov eivai; f e8 ti y false, 
 
 2. JJpocrexco^ev — avToh] Cf. tive, it may be true or false, 
 
 supra 233 d: <al pot, npoo-excov and this is doubtless a quality, 
 
 rov vovv cv pd\a airoKplvov . but belonging to its matter, 
 
 4. 7rpayfia — pfjparos] The not its form. Plato seems to 
 
 ovopa standing for the npaypa have taken no account of the 
 
 and the pr^pa for the irpa^is, formal distinction, negative or 
 
 ut supra. affirmative." Grote's Plato, vol. 
 
 21. 7rotoV Tiva] "Since the ii. p. 448 note. See, however, 
 
 time of Aristotle, the quality supr. 262 c, irpu^iv ovK anpa^iav, 
 
 of a proposition has been ovaiav ovros oibe pi) Svtos. Infr. 
 
 understood to designate its 263 e : (pao-iv re ku\ dno^aaiv. 
 
 being either affirmative or ne- The possibility of negation has 
 
 gative : that being formal, or been already proved: the ques- 
 
 belonging to its form only, tion now is, whether speech or 
 
 Whether affirmative or nega- thought can properly be made 
 
17( 
 
 i o 
 
 I7AATON02 
 
 the other 
 true. 
 The true 
 prnpiisit T • > 1 1 
 determines 
 in accord- 
 ance with 
 reality. 
 The false 
 proposition 
 also deter- 
 
 something, 
 as if real, 
 but that 
 something 
 is different 
 from the 
 reality. 
 Therefore, 
 in the se- 
 cond of the 
 two in- 
 stancesjust 
 given, The- 
 setetus is 
 made the 
 subject of 
 an unreal 
 determina- 
 tion, and 
 of another 
 predicate, 
 ■which is 
 treated 
 as if it were 
 the same 
 
 0EAI. TW plv xj/evSr] 7rov, rov 8e dXrjOr}. p- 
 
 HE. Ae'yei 8e avrwv o fxev dXijOys to. ovra w 
 eari irep\ aov. 
 
 GEAI. Ti p-ijv ; 
 5 HE. 'O 8e 8r) \lsev8r}? erepa tu>v ovtlov. 
 
 GEAI. Nat. 
 
 HE. Ta per) ovt apa &>? ovra Xeyei. 
 
 GEAI. 2 X e86v. 
 
 HE. 3 Ovtcdv 8e ye ovra ere pa irep\ gov. iroXXd 
 io fxev yap €<fiafj.€v ovra 7repl eKaarov eivai 7rov, 7roXXd 
 8e ovk ovra. 
 
 GEAI. K.ojj.i8f) pk€i> ovv. 
 
 HE. *Oi> varepov 8r) Xoyov elprjKa irep\ gov, c 
 TTpcorov fxev, e£ (bi> wpLadfieOa rl ttot eari Xoyos, 
 izavayKaiOTarov amov eva tu>v fipa^VTaTGdV elvai. 
 
 GEAI. Nvu 8r) yovv ravrrj ijvvcopLoXoyrjaapLev. 
 
 HE. 'Kweira 8e ye twos. 
 
 GEAI. OuW 
 
 HE. Ei 8e fir) ecrTL aos, ovk aXXov ye ov8evos. 
 
 the object of negation, and de- 
 scribed as false. In tbe Phile- 
 bus also (37 e) by the quality 
 of an opinion is meant truth 
 or falsity : <a\ eyevero ov povov 
 86£a 81a ravra aXXa ml iroid tis 
 eKarepa. 
 
 g."OvTO>v 8e ye ovra erepa nepi 
 
 a-ov] " Really being different 
 from what really is concerning 
 you : for we said that in re- 
 gard to each thing there ex- 
 ists much that is and much 
 that is not." I. e. the propo- 
 sition has a real significance, 
 though a significance which is 
 different from the true one. 
 10. ttov is to be construed 
 
 vwep^aTas with ecpapev. N\ B. 
 
 It is possible that in the phrase 
 
 ovkovv 6(tol ye tcov peyakav irou 
 
 ti k.t.X., supr. 235 e, i7ov ought 
 to have been taken virepfiaTas 
 with the whole sentence : = " I 
 presume you know." 
 
 15. eva reov ^pa^vrdrmv eivai\ 
 
 Because a subject and a pre- 
 dicate are essential to every 
 sentence. 
 
 19. Ei' be p.r] — oiBevos] The 
 object of these words, and of 
 
 a> vvv eya) 8ia\eyopai supra a, is 
 
 to bring out the falsity of the 
 proposition, by making it per- 
 fectly clear that Thesetetus is 
 the subject of whom "flying" 
 
20<M2TH2. 
 
 177 
 
 ?. 263. 0EAI. Ucos yap ; 
 
 AE. M?;5e^o? Se (ov ovS" dv Xoyo? eir) to ira- 
 pairav' dire(j)r]vapev yap on tcdv dhwdrmv i]v Xdyov 
 ovra fj.7]8ei>o? elvai Xoyov. 
 
 0EAI. 'Optforara. 
 d HE. rie/3i drj crov Xeyo/ieva fievroi flare pa coy to. 
 avrd Ka\ fir) ovra coy ovra, iravrdiracriv a>? eomev 
 r] roiavrrj crvvflecrLS e/c re prjfidrcou yiyvop.evri Ka\ 
 ovo/xdroov ourcD? re kol dXr]0co? yiyveaOat Xoyos 
 yj/evdr)?. 
 
 0EAI. ' AXyflearara p.ev ovv. 
 
 jSJE. TV Se Sr) ; Stdvoid re /ecu 86{ja /cat (^avracrla, 
 
 which be- 
 longs to 
 him. And 
 BUch .'1 
 combina- 
 ti> «ti of noun 
 and veil) 
 amounts 
 
 5 really and 
 truly to 
 falsehood 
 in speech. 
 But if 
 speech may 
 be false, 
 so may 
 thought, 
 opinion, 
 
 10 and ima- 
 gining. For 
 thought 
 and speech 
 are the 
 
 is predicated. If the propo- 
 sition had no subject, it would 
 not be a proposition, for it 
 was shewn that every propo- 
 sition has a subject : but it 
 belongs to no subject except 
 Thea^tetus. Therefore These- 
 tetus is the subject. This 
 conclusion is resumed in the 
 
 WOl'ds itep\ brj crov \ey6pevct. 
 
 Mr. Grote objects that here 
 and in Theset. 201, Plato, who 
 decries the " facts of sense," 
 selects an example of which 
 sense alone can judge. It may- 
 be replied that, in choosing the 
 simplest examples, he naturally 
 lights on what is obvious to the 
 senses. But, first, even in this 
 case the truth or falsehood is not 
 given by sense, but by reason- 
 ing upon sense ; and, secondly, 
 Plato would have said that 
 these " sensible analogies " (al- 
 
 o-drjTaL 6poi6rt]Tes, Polit. 285 e) 
 
 were only symbols of the higher 
 truths of which he spoke. 
 
 3. rjv] The past tense is 
 used not only because of the 
 
 aorist cnrtcprivapev, but also to 
 expi-ess that which is unalter- 
 able. 
 
 6. nepl Sj) o-ov] Compare 
 the similar " ad hominem" il- 
 lustration at the end of the 
 Thesetetus, p. 209 b : 6Zs yap 
 pe 8iavoovpevoi> cos ecrriv ovtos 
 
 QeClLTTjTOS K.T.X. 
 
 Uepl 8tj — pevroi Qarepa ] 
 
 The position of pevroc has 
 caused suspicion as to the 
 soundness of the text, but may 
 be accounted for by the em- 
 phasis on o-ov. Cf. nov supr. b, 
 and note. 
 
 Xeyopeva — <rvvdeo~is] For the 
 constr. cf. Phredo 69 c : x^P'-C '- 
 peva 8e <ppovT)crecos kui dWaTTopc-va 
 avr\ a\\i]\cov pi) o~Kiaypacpia tls fi 
 
 T] TOiaVTT) dpSTT) K.T.A. 
 
 7. cos eoiKev — yiyvccrdai] The 
 
 main verb is attracted into the 
 relative clause, as in Soph. 
 
 Trach. 1238 : dvrjp oS' , cos i'oi- 
 Kev, ov vepeiv e'juol (pdlvovri pol- 
 pav. Cf. Euthyd. 280 d : Aeiu 
 apa cos eoiKC-v. Phileb. 54 d : ovk- 
 ovv, onep (Xeyov — X"P LV ^X elv ^ e " / • 
 
 a 
 
178 
 
 MAATQN02 
 
 -Mill-. I \- 
 
 cepl that 
 thought is 
 inward and 
 Bilent, 
 
 while 
 speech 
 
 In thought. 
 Now in 
 
 speech 
 there is 
 affirmation 
 and denial : 
 and the 
 correspond- 
 ing deter- 
 mination 
 when tak- 
 ing place 
 in thought, 
 is called 
 Opinion. 
 And Opin- 
 ion, when 
 arising in 
 a medium 
 of sensa- 
 tion, is 
 called Ima- 
 gining. 
 
 pLGOv ovk ?}<5?; 8rjXov ori raura ru yevr) \j/eu8t] re kcii )>. 261 
 a\rj9r) irdvO' r/pcov eV rah \j/V)(ou? iyylyverai ; 
 
 GEAI. nw; 
 
 HE. '0.8' e'l&ei paov, av irpwrov Xdfiys, 77 TTOT 
 5 ecm kgu tl 8ca(j)epovaLi> eKacrr uXXyXcov. c 
 
 GEAI. Aidov p.ovov. 
 
 HE. Qvkovv 8iaifoia peu koll Xoyos tolvtov' TrXrjv 
 6 f.uv euros tyjs ^/v^r}? wpos amrjv 8iaXoyo? dvev 
 (pcovrj? yiyvofxevos tout ccvto r/pui> encovopiaaOr], 
 10 8 idvoia ; 
 
 GEAI. Yldvv p.ev ovv. 
 
 HE. To 8e y air eKelvr\<s pevp.a 8lol tov aroparos 
 Ibv pcerd (pOoyyov /ce'/cAr/rca \6y09. 
 
 GEAI. 'AA^. 
 15 HE. Kca pLrjv ev Xoyois avrb Xapev ov. 
 
 GEAI. To ttolov ; 
 
 HE. <t>daiv re kgll dir6<paaLv. 
 
 4. Xa/37?f, t'i] avTa, which 
 
 some editors insert between 
 these two words, is omitted by 
 the Bodleian, with most other 
 MSS. 
 
 6. Ai8ov juoW] The meta- 
 phor implied in Ad/^s is con- 
 tinued. 
 
 7. Ovkovv — ravTov] Cf.Theast. 
 189 e : to Se oiavoelcrdai dp' 
 07Tfp eya> KaXels ', Tl KcikSiv ; Ao- 
 
 yOVj OV aVTTj TTpOS ClVTTjV 7] ^V)(r) 
 
 dief-epXeTcii 7rep\ a>v av aKonf/. 
 
 In the present passage, as also 
 in Phileb. 38 d, (in the ac- 
 count of $6ga,) the distinction, 
 as well as the likeness, between 
 inward and outward language, 
 is marked out. 
 
 12. To 8e y 07J- 5 ineiprjs pevpa] 
 
 Cf. Tkeset. 206 d : tt\v 86gav 
 
 QK.TVTTOVjxeVOV (Is T7)V Sid TOV (TTO- 
 
 [j.aTos por]v. Phileb. 1. c. : rd 
 
 Te TTpos avTov pr/Liara evrelvas 
 els (pcuvrjV Ttpbs tov napovra avra 
 tout av irakiv (p8e'y$-at.TO, Knl 
 Xdyos 8f] ylyovev ovtcos Tore 
 86£av eKaXovpev. 
 
 15. avTo] For airo, antici- 
 pating the correlative word, 
 though less distinctly than 
 here, cf. Theset. 207 d : elra 
 
 dpvrjpovels ev Trj tG>v ypapadrav 
 fjiadrjcrei Kar dp^d? cravTov re Kal 
 tovs aXXovs 8p£>VTas ai>Ta ; 0. 
 'Kpa Xeyeis k.t.X. 2. TavTa 
 Xeya. Herm. unnecessarily 
 conj. owrot : Wagner av t68\ 
 See also supr. 243 a, eKelvo, 
 and 256 d, where the antece- 
 dent of aurd had not been 
 distinctly expressed ; and cf. 
 Polit. 262 a: tovto ye — NE. To 
 
20<M2TH2. 
 
 171) 
 
 GEAI. "lafieu. 
 
 aE. ' Otclv ovv tovto eV ^j/v)(fj Kara hiavoiav 
 iyylyvrjTou /iera ariyrj?, irXip <^£'v ? ^X 6is> " TL 7r P 00 '' 
 eiTrr)? avro ; 
 
 GEAI. Kou irm ; 
 
 SE. TV 5' oraz> /i?) /ca#' avryu dXXd Si alaOrj- 
 aea>9 wapfj tlvl to tolovtov av irdOos, dp o\ov re 
 6p9(DS ehrziv erepou n irXrjv (j)avTao~[av ; 
 
 GEAI. OvUv. 
 
 iS?E. Qvkovv tTreiTTep Xoyos dXrjOrjs 1 rjv kcu \j/ev- 
 Sr]?, tovtcov & ifpavi] Sidvoia plv avrrjs irpos eavrrju 
 ifsvXV? SiaXoyo9) Soija 8e Siavoia? dTroTeXevrrjcris, 
 (f) a [vera i de b Aeyofxev avppu^Ls aio-6r)o~€a>? kcu 
 86£r)9, dvdyKTj Srj kcu tovtcov tw Xoyco ^vyyevcav 
 
 OVT(£>V \jf6vSr) T€ GtVTWV Q.VIO. KCU €VLOT€ HUGH. 
 
 GEAI. Um V ov ; 
 
 /HE. KcLTavoe'i? ovv otl wpoTepov evpeOr] ^€v8yj9 
 
 io Thought 
 then being 
 mental self- 
 colloquy, 
 Opinion the 
 completion 
 of thought, 
 and Ima- 
 gining the 
 meeting- 
 
 15 point of 
 Opinion 
 and Sense, 
 since 
 speech may 
 
 2. "Orav — avro] The passage 
 of the Philebus just quoted is 
 exactly parallel. 
 
 6. pr) Kaff avrr]v~\ Sc. rfj ^\rvxfl. 
 
 The distinction, here brought 
 out underlies much of the later 
 portion of the Thesetetus. The 
 imagination of an absent ob- 
 ject, which is omitted here, is 
 described in Phileb. 38. 
 
 7. ai>] This word is to be 
 taken by an hyperbaton with 
 the whole clause. 
 
 Trddos] Cf. Theset. 193 d : 
 
 to tt)s 86£r]s nd&os. 
 
 11. tovtcov] Viz. the mental 
 processes. 
 
 12. So^a Se Siavolas dnoTe'hfv- 
 Trjo-is] This is vividly expressed 
 in the passage of the Theretetus 
 above quoted, p. 1 90 a : bWav 
 
 Se (J) ^fvxr]) oplcracra, e'lre /3paSu- 
 Tepov, eire kcu o^VTepov eirat^acra, 
 to avTO i[8r) (fir) Kal prj Sierra^, 
 86£av TavTrjv Tideuev avrrj?. 
 
 13. (paiveTai 8e 6 Xe'yopevJ 
 
 " What we speak of as Imagin- 
 ing." The same form of ex- 
 pression occurs in Theset. 164 
 b : to 8e ye ov% Spa ovk eViorornt 
 eo~Tiv, e'nrep Kal to opa e7ri'crrarai. 
 
 14. 7<5 Aoya) cvyyevatv ovtg>v~\ 
 
 This has been shewn in the 
 preceding sentences, airmu is 
 pleonastic. It is probably im- 
 plied that mere alo-flrjcris is nei- 
 ther true nor false. 
 
 15. -^revbrj elvai] This is 
 
 shewn by an independent proof 
 in the case of So'ga in the pas- 
 sage of the Philebus above 
 quoted (38 d). 
 
 a a 2 
 
ISO 
 
 IIAATON02 
 
 be false, so 
 
 also may 
 
 these con- 
 
 gl'IRTsVil" 
 
 speech. 
 The search 
 for false- 
 hood has 
 ended 
 sooner 
 than we 
 expected : 
 and we 
 may return 
 with better 
 courage to 
 what re- 
 mains of 
 our origi- 
 nal task. 
 
 86{ja Kca Xoyo9 y kcito. ri)u irpoaSoKiav yv i(j)ol3i]- p. 264. 
 Ot]\x(.v apri, firj TTavrdiraaiv u.vi']vvtov kpyov €7Ti(3aX- 
 Xoi/ieOa Q-jTovvres clvto ; 
 0EAI. Karafow. 
 
 5 SE. Mr) TOIVVV /ITjS' €19 TO. XoLTTO. O.6vflC0fJL€V. 
 
 eVetS?) yap 7re(f)aPTaL raura, rwv epirpoaOiv avapvy- c 
 aOcopLev /car e'ldr) ^Latpiaecov. 
 
 0EAI. UolcDv bfj ; 
 
 HE. Aiei\6p.€0a Trj9 el8(oXo7rouK7Js eiSrj 8vo, rrjv 
 10 p.lv eucaoTiic/jv, rr)v 8e (pavTao-Tucqv. 
 
 0EAI. Nat. 
 
 HE. Kai tov cro(f)LcrTr)u 6L7TOfi€V 0)9 airopoip.ev el9 
 birorepav 6r)crofiev. 
 
 6EAI. 3 H.v Tavra. 
 15 HE. Kai roi>#' rj/JLcov a7ropov/JL€vcov eri fxeiQav 
 K<x,T€)(V0r] aKOTo8ivia, (j)avevT09 tov Xoyov tov iraaiv 
 afi<pLo-(3r)TOvi>T09 a>9 ovt€ eiKcov ovt€ ei8coXov OVT€ 
 <pdvTaarp.a e'lr) to irapdirav ov8lv 8id to fxr)8apa>9 d 
 p.7]8e7TOT€ p.r)8apiov -^£v8o9 eivai. 
 
 1. r)v i<poj3qdr]ixev] This cog- 
 nate accusative of the relative 
 occurs several times in Plato, 
 e.g. in Kep. 4, 434 e : vvv S' i<- 
 
 TeXeacopev ttjv o~Ke\j/iv r)v wrjdrjptv, 
 el — €7Tix el PW al l JLev Sedaaadai, paov 
 av — KariSeu/. lb. 443 b : Te- 
 Xeov apa rjplv to ivvirviov b e'cpapev 
 viroTTTevcrai k.t.X. Legg. 2, 666 
 b : 7rai8idv, tjv — tois dvdpoi7rois 
 ibcoprjcraTo tov oivov (pdppanov. 
 
 2. apTi] P. 261 a, b. 
 c7n(3aX\oipe6a] " Were im- 
 posing on ourselves." Cf. Tim. 
 
 48 cl : 6>s 6p6a>s eVt^ejpot^' dv 
 ToaoiiTOV eTTifiaXXopevos epyov. 
 6. Tutv ep.Trpoo~8ev — 8iaipco~e<ov] 
 
 The thread of argument is now 
 
 completely resumed from supr. 
 236. 
 
 16. KaTexvOrj] Cf. Polit.302 C: 
 tov vvv £TviK.()(yp.zvov Xoyov kclt 
 
 dp X ds. Legg. 7, 793 b. The 
 image here seems to be that 
 of a cloud or mist. Compare 
 Horn. II. Y. 321 : avTiKa to> pev 
 eVeiTrt kcit 6(p6aXpa>v x* ev u%Xvv. 
 lb. II. 344 : Kara 8' ScpOaXpcov 
 k£)(vt dxXvs. 
 
 <puvevTos] Cf. Theaet. 199 c : 
 
 Beivorepov pevroi irddos dXXo napa- 
 <fiaiveo~6ai pot 8oKe1. 
 
 Trdo~iv\ Sc. toIs Xeyopevois. 
 I. e. objecting equally to <pav- 
 Tao-TLKrj, elKaoTTiKT], and el8coXo~ 
 nouKrj. 
 
20<I>I2TH2. 
 
 181 
 
 64. 0EAI. Aeyei? oAjjfl}. 
 
 £?E. Nvi> 8e y eireLdrj irtyavTai pcev Xoyo?, ttI- 
 (pavTOLL 5' ovaa 8o£a \j/ev8ij9, iyx<x>P*L &) fUfJLTjfJiaTa 
 twv ovTUiV eivai koll riyvi-jv e'/c ravTTjS yiyveaOai tyjs 
 8ia0€(T€co9 airaTrjTUcqv. 5 
 
 0EAI. 'EyxcopeL 
 
 S*E. Kal jjlt}v on y r\v 6 o~o([)i(rT7]S tovtwv tto- 
 repov, SicofJLo\oyr)/uLei>ov rjfxiv iv tols irpoaOev rjv. 
 
 0EAI. Not. 
 e 3?E. ITaA^ tolvvv liTL-)(eLpu>ixev, ayjitpvTes 8i)(f} to io 
 irporeOev yevos, iropemcrOaL Kara tovtu Sefya del 
 fxepos rov TjirjOevTO?, e^ofxevot tt}? tov ao^iarov 
 KOivcovias, ecoy av avrov ra kolvol iravra Trepitkovres, 
 rr]v OLKtiav XmovTes (f)vcriu eVtSe/^co/uei/ fidXicrTa plv 
 p. 265. rjfXLV avrols; eireiTa Se /cat tow eyyvTarco yevet rrj? 15 
 TOLavrrjs fxeOoSov TretyvKocriv. 
 
 0EAI. 'Opdfc. 
 
 Conch/r 
 sion of I. 
 After dis- 
 tinguishing 
 likeness- 
 making 
 into ini.-i'ji 
 making 
 and phan- 
 tastic, we 
 doubted in 
 which com- 
 partment 
 to place the 
 Sophist, 
 when there 
 arose the 
 more im- 
 portant 
 doubt, 
 which we 
 have just 
 resolved. 
 
 4. ravTT]s ttJs SiaBe&ecos] Sc. 
 <irev8ovs 86£t]s. 
 
 I J. tovtcdv ivore pov\ " One 01' 
 
 other of these two things." 
 Either eifcao-riKd? or (pavracmKos. 
 
 io. nakiv toiwv] "Let us 
 therefore go to work again, 
 and dividing in half each kind 
 that is set before us, advance, 
 taking always the right side 
 of that which has been bisected 
 last, and clinging fast to that 
 which holds the Sophist, until, 
 having peeled off all that is 
 common to him with others, 
 we leave only his proper na- 
 ture, and declare this, first and 
 chiefly to ourselves, but also to 
 those besides whose genius is 
 most near of kin to this sort 
 of method." For Kara tovttI 
 begia, cf. Plisedr. 266 a : axrnfp 
 
 Se (rafiaros e§ evos 6WA2 kci\ 
 6p.a>vvpa ne(pvKe, ra p.ev (TKaid, ra 
 8e 8e£ia Kkrjdivra k.t.X. 
 
 12. ixofxcvoi — noivavias\ I.e. 
 
 Making the participation of 
 the Sophist in each kind our 
 test and clue. The notion of 
 Koivaula, when once established, 
 is well used. Cf. Theaet. 209 c, 
 [xvrine'iov, and note. 
 
 15. to7s eyyvrdra) y£vei\ Cf. 
 Soph. Ant. 174 : yevovs kcit dy- 
 XUTreia : and for the meaning, 
 Pluedr. 266 b : tovtcov — av- 
 T0£ re epaarTjs — twv Suiipecrectv 
 Kal crvvayayav — idv re tiv ciKKov 
 rjyrjO-wpai Svvarov ets ev Kal em 
 ttoXXci TreCpvKos opqv, tovtov diaxoy 
 KaTo-rncrOe p.er' 'l^viov ware 6eo1o. 
 For e7J-tSet£a>/nei>, cf. Slipr. 235 C 
 
 (where the same thing is spoken 
 of) : dTrocprjvat n)v aypav. 
 
182 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 We are 
 
 11. iw at li- 
 berty to 
 continue 
 our series 
 of divisions, 
 which be- 
 gan with 
 the distinc- 
 tion of cre- 
 ative and 
 acquisitive 
 art. Our 
 previous 
 definitions 
 were ob- 
 tained by 
 following 
 the sections 
 of acquisi- 
 tive art. 
 But as he 
 now ap- 
 pears as an 
 imitator, 
 we must 
 divide crea- : 
 tive art, of 
 which the 
 making of 
 imitations 
 is obviously 
 a branch. 
 
 mE. Ovkovv tut€ fieis r)p^opaOa 7TQL^tlk^u kill p 
 KT)]TiKr)i> T€)(i>7]u Siaipovpevoi ; 
 0EAI. kw. 
 HE. Koci ttjs KTrjTiKrj? Iv 6i)pevTiKfj KCii uycovia 
 
 5KCU ifXTTOpLKYj Kal TLCTIV Iv T0L0VT019 U§€CTLV e(f)aVTU- 
 
 (etf rjixiv ; 
 
 GEAI. Haw pev ovv. 
 
 HE. Nw 8e y iiretdr) papLrjTiKr) ire pie tXrjfev avTov 
 re\vrj, SrjXov a>? avTrjv tt)v 7ron]TLKr)v oV^a SiatpeTtuv 
 io7rpcoTi]v. 7] yap irov fAifirjcrL? 7rolr)<TL$ r/? io~Tiv, h 
 elScoXcov pevTOL, (J)apLev, dXX ovk avTcov eKaarcou. i) 
 yap; 
 
 GEAI. Ylavrairaai p,ev ovv. 
 
 HE. UoiT]TlKrJ9 St) TTpCOTOV SvO edTCO pL€pTJ. 
 
 '5 0EAI. Uolco; 
 
 HE. To pev 6eiov, to ft avOpcoTuvov. 
 
 GEAI. Outtu) p.epadr]Ka. 
 
 HE. Uoir]TLK7]v, eiirep p.ep.vr)pe6a tcl KaT ap^as 
 XzyOevTa, iraaav kdjyapev elvai SvvapLiv, r\ tis av aWta 
 yiyvr]Tai toIs pur] irpoTepov ovatv vaTtpov yiyveadai. 
 
 GEAI. MepLV7]pLe6a. 
 
 HE. Zcoa 8rj iravTa 6vf)Ta Kal (f)VTa, 6o~a r iiri c 
 yrjs €K cnreppLaTOdv Ka\ pt^cov (f)v€Tai Ka\ oora a^rvya 
 
 265. 
 
 1. Tjpxoixeda — Simp.] "We be- 
 gan by dividing." 
 
 5. e(pavTa£e8' fjfiiv] Sic Bodl. 
 
 " We bad glimpses of hirn." 
 
 C). SijAoi/ Q)S aVTTjV TTjV 7TOITJTL- 
 
 ktjv] "The very art of mak- 
 ing," of wbicb image-making 
 is a part. We bave bere an 
 example of tbe mental initia- 
 tive by wbicb the one idea is 
 found wbicb is afterwards divi- 
 ded, according to Pbileb. 1 6 c. 
 
 1 1 . avTwv eKacrrcoi/] That this 
 
 phrase is vernacular and not 
 technical appears from Aesch. 
 Prom. 952 : aXX' aid' ckcwtt £k- 
 4>pd(e. Compare also Aristotle's 
 
 avdeKaa-roi tls. Etb. N. IV. 7, § 4. 
 
 18. kot dpxas] P. 219b: nav 
 onep av p.rj irporepov tls oi> varepov 
 els ovalav ayrj. 
 
 2 2. (pvra,o(TaT — citt]Ktci] The 
 
 notion of <pvra is expanded by 
 an afterthought. 
 
2(M>I2TH2. 
 
 183 
 
 p. 265. ev yfj tjvplcrTaTca acofiara ttjktol kcu arrjKra, ptcov 
 aXXov tlvos i] 6eov SrjpuovpyovvTOs d>7}(T0fi€v varepop 
 yiypeaOcu irporepop ovk ovtcc ; i) tu> tcdp ttoXXcov 
 Boy pan kcu piyxart \pchp.epoL ; 
 
 9EAI. Uolcp; 
 
 iH'E. Ttp Ttiv (j)vcnv aura, yeppqv caro tlpos air Las 
 auTopdrys kcu avev diapolas (frvovcrrjs' ?) perd Xoyov 
 re kcu iTrMTTrjpLrp? Qeias diro Qeov yiypopLeprjs ; 
 d 0EAI. 'Kya> uep lacos did tt]P yXiKiap ttoXXukls 
 dpLffcorepa pLeraSofjatfi)' vvv p.i]v fiXerroop els ere kcu 
 viroXapfidpcop dieaOal ere Kara ye 6ehv aura ylyve- 
 aOai, Tavrrj kcu avros vevopuKa. 
 
 £E. KaXcos ye, d> QealrrjTe. kcu el pep ye ere 
 rjyovixeOa tcov els top eTretra \povop dXXcos ttcos 
 So^a^oprcop elpca, vvv c\p tcd Xoyco pterd TreiOovs 
 apayKaias eireyeipovpev iroielp opcoXoyeip' eirei^r] Se' 
 aov KarapapOdpco tt)p (pvenp, on kcu avev twp Trap 
 e iiawv Xoycop avrrj irpoaeicrip i(j) direp vvv eXKecrOcu 
 
 Creative 
 art is, 1st, 
 divine and 
 human. 
 For i" ( rod, 
 working by 
 reason, run! 
 not l" ;uiy 
 mere spon- 
 taneity of 
 nature, is 
 to be re- 
 ferred the 
 origin of 
 animals, 
 vegetables 
 and mine- 
 rals. 
 
 Thesetetus, 
 although 
 
 young, is 
 inclined to 
 this opin- 
 ion, and 
 the Stran- 
 ger, consi- 
 dering the 
 nobility of 
 his nature, 
 
 I. rrjKra kol arrjKTa] I.e. Me- 
 tals and other minerals. 
 
 4. ypw/xei/oi ] Sc. (p7](ronev 
 yiyveadai. 
 
 The following passage con- 
 tains the same religious spirit 
 which is more fully expressed 
 in the Tirnreus and in the 10th 
 book of the Laws ; cf. esp. 
 Legg. 10, 889-892. Also Phi- 
 leb. 28 d, e. 
 
 I I. Kara ye 6eov] " At least in 
 accordance with the nature of 
 God." 
 
 13. Kcikcos ye, a> Qeairijre.] 
 With similar warmth in Theset. 
 185 e there is welcomed the 
 assertion of the independent 
 activity of the mind : KaA6s 
 
 yap el, &> 6., — 6 yap KaXcos \eyoov, 
 
 KaXos re KayaQos. 
 
 15. So%a£6vT(ov\ "Of that class 
 of persons who in later life 
 think otherwise." The present 
 participle has almost become a 
 noun, and has lost the tempo- 
 ral meaning. 
 
 fiera TreiBovs dvayKaias] This 
 
 " demonstrative persuasion " 
 is advanced in the 10th book 
 of the Laws, where it is 
 shewn that Mind is prior to 
 the elements of Nature, and 
 that the best mind rules. Cf. 
 esp. pp. 888 e sqq., 891 c, 
 892 b, 896 c, 897 c. See also 
 ib. 12, 967 c. Tim. 46 e. 
 
 Treidovs di'ayKaias] " The per- 
 suasion of demonstration." 
 
184 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 thinks it 
 unneces- 
 sary, by 
 further 
 
 argument, 
 to antici- 
 pate the 
 
 rll'i-rl of 
 
 time. 
 
 But, andly, 
 divine and 
 human art 
 are each 
 divided 
 into an art 
 of making 
 realities 
 and an art 
 of likeness- 
 making. 
 
 027$*, iucrco' xpovos yap e/c irepiTTov yiyvour av. p. 
 a A Act Oijaco to. fxlv (fwaei Xeyo/xeva TroieladaL 6 da 
 T ^X V V'> 7 "**»^' 6 ' K tovtcov vtt di't9pco7ra>v ^vviaTa/xeva 
 dvdpco7rlvr], /cat Kara tovtov 8i) tov Xoyov 8vo ttoltj- 
 5 tlki~is ytvr\, to p.ev avOpamLvov elvai, to 8e Qeiov. 
 
 9EAI. *Op0m. 
 
 SE. Te/xve 8rj 8vo1v ovaaiv 8'iya eKaTepav avOts. 
 
 0EAI. nc5y; 
 
 aE. Olov tot€ fiev /cara 7rAaro? Tep.va)v tijv ttol- p. 
 iorjTLKT]u Traaav, vvv 8e av /cara firJK09. 
 
 6EAI. TeTfiycrOco. 
 
 ££E. TeTTapa fxrjv avTrjs ovtco to. irdvTa fie'pr) 
 ylyveTai, 8vo fiev tol irpos rjfJLwv, dvOpumeia, 8vo 8' 
 av to. irpbs Oecov, 0eia. 
 is 9EAI. Nat. 
 
 HE. Ta 8e y co? kripoa'S av 8ir\py}p.£va, fiepos fiev 
 
 ev d(f) eKaTepa? Trj? pLepi8o9 avTOTroimLKov, tco 8* 
 
 vttoXoittcq o~)(e8bv fiaXiaT av XeyoiaOrjv el8a>Xo- 
 
 7rouKco. K.a\ Kara Tama 8y] ttolXlv r/ 7roir]TiKr) 8l)(tj 
 
 20 SiaipeiTou. 
 
 0EAI. A eye otttj eKaTepa o.v6l$. b 
 
 1. XP° V0S y^p e ' K irepiTTov yi- 
 yvoir av] " For to do other- 
 wise would be to supersede 
 the work of Time." 
 
 2. ra. — Cpvcrei] Either cpvcrei 
 
 has almost the force of au adj., 
 as in Rep. 6, 501 b (to cpvcrei 
 Sinaiov k.t.X.) ; and Xeyopeva is 
 added pleonastically, like the 
 participle in heivor^res Sokov- 
 <tu, Theret. 176 d : or, per- 
 haps better, the infinitive noi- 
 ela-dm is to be repeated with 
 
 Xeyopeva. 
 
 9. Kara ttXcitos — Kara p-r/KOs] 
 
 Compare Phsedr. 266 a, already 
 quoted. 
 
 13. 7rpos fjpav — irpos Beau] 
 
 " On our side, on the side of 
 the Gods." 
 
 1 6. Ta 8e y cos erepcos] " Then 
 
 as to the divisions which were 
 made in the other way." &>? 
 is pleonastic, as in <a? dXrjdcbs. 
 
 17. avroiroiTjTiKop] The art of 
 making the things themselves. 
 
 21. Aeye — av6n] "Tell me 
 once more how each (ttoitjtikti 
 deia, avBpanlvq) is divided (8iai- 
 peirai).' 
 
2CXM2TH2. 
 
 185 
 
 p. 266. HE. 'Huei? uev 7T0V kcu rdXXa ^coa Kal e{j cov to. 
 
 7T€(f)VK0T e(TTl, TTVp KCU vdcop KCU TCt TOVTCOV u8eX(jja, 
 
 Oeov yevvrjpara Travra Xafiev aura aireipyaaueva 
 €Ka(TTa' r) irm ; 
 
 0EAI. Ovrm. 5 
 
 HE. Tovtoov 8e ye eKctarcov et'<5coAa, aAA' ovk 
 aura, 7rap67T€Tai, Baifiovia kcu ravra u-qyavfi yeyo- 
 vora. 
 
 0EAI. Uola; 
 
 HE. Tec re ev rots* vttvols kcu ocra u€0' rjuepav 10 
 (pavTaauaTa avro(pvrj Xeyerai, ctklol fxev otcw ev rco 
 c TTvpi (tkoto? eyyiyvrjrai, 8l7tXovv 8e yjvlk av (j)a>s,- 
 OLKtlov re kcu aXXorpiov 7repl tol Xauirpa kcu Xela eh 
 
 Divinely 
 made like- 
 nesses are, 
 for in- 
 stance, 
 thosewhich 
 appear in 
 
 i. e| av ra] The same use 
 of the article occurs in a simi- 
 lar connexion in Protag. 320 c: 
 Kai t&v oaa nvpl Kal yjj nepdv- 
 WTai. 
 
 3. avra eicaora] Ut Supra : 
 
 opposed to eKaarav e'i8co\a 
 infra. 
 
 7. TrapeTrerai — infr. C, irapa- 
 ko\ov6ovv\ So irapaKokovQel in 
 Theset. 158 c, of dreams an- 
 swering to realities. 
 
 1 1 . cpavrda-para avTO(pvrj\ Na- 
 tural images, opposed to arti- 
 ficial ones, such as those of 
 the painter. 
 
 o-Kia pev — 8nr\ovv 6V] The 
 latter word is not forthcoming 
 in Rep. 6, 510 a : Aeyw 6V rds 
 elKovas 7fpa>TOp pev to? (TKids, 
 eireira ra iv toi? v8a<ri (pavrd- 
 apara Kal iv roiy ova irvKvd re 
 Kal Xela Kal (pavd o-vveo~Tr]Ke. For 
 
 other observations on optical 
 reflexion, cf. Theaet. 193 c, Tim. 
 
 43- 
 
 1 2. The words (pas oueelov Kal 
 
 aWorpiov — els ev o-vve\66v ("the 
 light belonging to things bright 
 and smooth meeting in one 
 upon their surface with the 
 light from another object") 
 may be illustrated by compar- 
 ing Tim. 46 a : eK yap rrjs eKTOs 
 evros re rov nvpos eKarepov koiv<o- 
 vias, evos re av irepl ttjv XeiorrjTa 
 eKao-Tore yevopevov. Objects 
 
 which give a perfect reflection, 
 such as smooth water, polished 
 metal, &c, were supposed to 
 have in them a luminous prin- 
 ciple which met on the smooth 
 surface with the light from the 
 reflected object, just as the fire 
 in the eye encountered the ex- 
 ternal fire in the act of vision. 
 It appears from the same pas- 
 sage compared with Theret. I.e., 
 that the words ttjs epnpoaSev 
 ela>6vias o\j/ea>s ivavr'iav a'io~dr)o~iv 
 
 refer to the transposition of 
 right and left in the reflected 
 irnace. 
 
 B b 
 
18() 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 mid, in tin' 
 day-time, 
 
 sIiuiImV. -i 
 
 and reflec- 
 tions. 
 
 And, as a 
 house is a 
 humanly- 
 made real- 
 ity, so the 
 picture of 
 a house is 
 a sort of 
 humanly- 
 created 
 waking 
 dream. 
 
 ev £vi>e\0oi> Tr/<? tpirpoaOev dcoOvla? uyj/eoo? ivavTiav p. 266 
 alaOrjaii/ 7rap6)(ov €180? airzpyaijqiai. 
 
 GEAI. Avo yap ovv earl raura Oela? epya 
 7ron']iT€co?, avro re kou to irapaitoXovOovv eiBooXov 
 5 eKaarco. 
 
 HE. TV Se rr)v i-jixerepav rey^vqv ; up ovk avrrju 
 fiev oiKiav oiKoSo/JLiKf) (jy-qaopev irotelv, ypcMpiKrj 8e 
 riv eWepav, olov ovap avBpwiTLvov eyprjyopocnv aireip- 
 yacrpevrjv ; 
 o GEAI. Yldvv p.ev ovv. d 
 
 HE. Ovkovv Kail TaXXa ovrco /caret Svo currct epya 
 ttjs rj/merepa? av 7rotr)TiKr]$ Trpdijecos, to /lev avTO, 
 (pa/me'v, avTOvpyiKr], to Se etdcoXov elSutXoTrouKr) . 
 
 GEAI. Nvv /JLaXXov e/xadov, /cat tlOyj/jll Bvo Bixfj 
 iS7TOL7]TiKrJ9 eiSr/' -fOela-f plv /cat •\dv0pco7TLV7]j' koto. 
 Oarepov TpLrjpa, /cara <5e OaWepov to pev avTcou bv, to 
 8e 6/JLOioo/JiaT(oi> Tivwv yevvrjp.a. 
 
 6. rjpeTepav] I. e. avOpasTvivqv. 
 
 (prja-onev is to be. supplied from 
 what follows. 
 
 avTTjv — oIkiciv~\ " A real 
 house." Not the ideal house, 
 as in Eep. 10, 597 e : airrjv — 
 
 6 ear 1 KXlvrj. 
 
 8. ovap a.v6p£mivov~\ I. e. As 
 dreams are a kind of divine 
 pictures, so a picture may be 
 described as a human dream. 
 
 eyprjyopoo-iv] " For those who 
 are awake." 
 
 11. Kara Suo] Like Kad' ev, 
 
 Kar okiyov. " By twos." " In 
 pairs." Cf. Theset. 156 b. 
 
 12. to — avro] "The thing 
 itself." The grammar seems to 
 
 require avTovpyinrjs eldcoXoTroi- 
 
 iKrjs. But there may be a 
 change of construction from 
 epya. (ecrrt) rrjs ttoit]tik)]S to av- 
 
 rovpyiKr] (eVrt 7Tot.ovo-a) to aiJTO. 
 Compare the transition imme- 
 diately below, from ^01777-4*07 to 
 yswrjpa, from the art to the 
 work. 
 
 14. 860 5t^»] "Two in two 
 ways :" i.e. («) divine, human ; 
 (b) reality, shadow. 
 
 1 5- T#ei'aT pev Ka\ fdvdpco7riVT] f] 
 Probably Qeiav p. k. av&puiiivr]i>, 
 as Heincl. observes. 
 
 16. avT&v] " Of things them- 
 selves." Although the fourfold 
 division, in Kep. 6 sub fin., 
 of the intelligible and visible is 
 different and has a different 
 object, it is prompted by a 
 fancy very similar to that 
 which rules in the present 
 passage. 
 
 1 7. yewrjpa] For this use of 
 the neuter word where the 
 
2CMI2TH2. 
 
 187 
 
 Next fol- 
 lows the 
 distinction 
 which was 
 before pro 
 vieionally 
 made, be- 
 tween 
 5 Imaee- 
 
 a real :uid 
 an appa- 
 rent like- 
 
 p. 266. aE. Trjs tolvvv elSooXovpyucrjs dva/j.vt]aOcofJLev bri 
 to fxev eiKaariKOv, to 8e <pavTao~TUCov efxeXXev eivai 
 e yevos, el to \J/ev8o? ovtcos ov ^/ev8o9 /cat tcov ovtcov 
 ev tl (fraveirj 7re(f)v /coy. 
 0EAI. 'H^ yap ovv. 
 3?E. Ovkovv €(f)dvr] re /ecu 8id Tama 8rj KaTapi- jJndpfan- 
 
 /\ ' > \ -. > 1 n r ''£>£' tastic ; the 
 
 UfXTjaofiev avTco vvv avapL(J)to-pi]Tr)Tcos eio?; duo ; creation of 
 
 GEAI. No/. 
 -). 2,6j. 3?E. To tolvvv (j)avTaorTiKov 
 8t X a. 
 
 GEAI. Ufj; 
 
 £*E. To /xei/ 6Y opydvcov yiyvofjtevov, to 8e avTov ^^ ded - 
 irape^ovTOs iavTov opyavov tov ttoiqvvtos to <fidv- ki n di3 
 
 Taaaa. unpersons 
 
 ' tion or 
 
 GEAI. fid)? 0rj?; 15 mimicry. 
 
 SE. r 'QTav, oIjjloi, to aov o-yrjfxa tis tco iavTov 
 Xpcop-evos acofiaTt TrpoaopLOiov y (f)covi)v (ficovfj (f)a(v€- 
 o~6ai 7roif}, fiifxrjaLS 1 tovto tyjs (pavTao-TiKijs /xaAio-Ta 
 KeK\r)Tai irov. 
 
 GEAI. No/. 
 
 3?E. M.lJJLY)TlKOV 8r] TOVTO aVTTj? TrpocrenrovTes diro- 
 
 av*0LS dtoplQo/xev negsofa 
 
 tiling. Of 
 
 10 these.plian- 
 
 tastic may 
 
 be acain 
 
 feminine was ratlier to be ex- 
 pected, cf. infr. 267 c, /-"'/x^a, 
 Polit. 289 b, Opepfia. As the 
 act sometimes becomes the ob- 
 ject of the verb (in the con- 
 straction known . as cognate 
 accusative), so the noun ex- 
 pressive of the object is some- 
 times put for the act. See 
 General Introduction. 
 
 2. epeXkev] P. 236 d, e. 
 7. avT(o\ Sc. eincKTTiKri Kal 
 <fiavTa(TTLKr]. 
 
 16. "Orav — ttov] In this sen- 
 tence TTpoaojioiov (palveadcu iroifj 
 
 is equivalent to dcpofioicorai. : 
 
 cf. (paiveaOai Troieiv below. 
 
 " When any one represents or 
 nearly represents your appear- 
 ance by means of his own 
 body, or your voice by his 
 voice, imitation is the name 
 for this branch of the phan- 
 tastic art." 
 
 17. <fia>vfj] Governed by xpw- 
 fievos. 
 
 2 I . aTvoveifiaii(6a\ " Part off 
 for our own share." Cf. Phsedr. 
 266 b, refivofxevos. 
 
 E b 2 
 
188 IIAAT0N02 
 
 veipwpeOa' to <$' aXXo nav d(jjaip.€v /xaXaKiaOevTes p. 267. ,; 
 kcu 7rapei>Te? tTe'pcp avvayayelv re els ev Kai irpeirov- » 
 crav e7ra>i>v/j.iav diro8ovvai tiv avTcp. 
 
 0EAI. NevepyaOoo, to 8e peOeiaOco. 
 5 SE. Kai firjv kcu. rovro eri 8iirXovv, co QeaiTrjTe, 
 d^iov -qyelcrOai' 81 a 8e, o-KOirei. 
 
 0EAI. Aeye. 
 
 Mimicry is £££. T<W pupOVpevOOV Oi [llv el8oTeS O jXLfXOVVTai 
 
 sometimes 
 
 with know- TOUTO TTpOLTTOVCTLV, 01 8' OVK €l8oT69. KCU TOL TLVCL 
 
 sometimes 10 peifco 8iaipeo-iv dyvcoarias re kcCl yvcocrecos 6t}- 
 
 without. 
 
 aofiev ; 
 
 0EAI. OvSefiiav. 
 
 HE. Ovkovv to ye dpTL XeyOev e\8oTUiV rjv p.1- 
 pLrj/uLa. to yap crop o~xf)fia kcu ae yiyvcocrKcov dv tls 
 
 *Sfll/JLrjO-CUTO. 
 
 0EAI. Um 8' ov ; c 
 
 SE. T7 8e 8iKcaoo-vvri$ to o-^fta /cai oXrjg fvA- 
 
 Xy(38rju dpeTrj? ; a/)' ouk ayyooLJi/res yueV, 8o^dtpvTe$ 
 
 8e 7rr), cr<p68pa eTn^eipovat iroXXoX to 8okovv a(picri 
 
 iotovto toy eVcw avTOis irpoOvp-elaOaL (paivecrOai ttoluv, 
 
 o tl p.aXio~Ta epyois re kcu Xoyois [xip.ovp.evoi ; 
 
 0EAI. Kai Trdvv ye iroXXoi 
 
 There are £?E. McoV OW TTOLVTeS CmOTVyYOiVOVO'L TOV 8oKeLV 
 
 those, for ' A 
 
 i. /xaXaKio-^eVTes] " Shrink- it not notorious that many, 
 
 ing from further effort." Cf. who have no knowledge but 
 
 supr. 241 c : anoarrja-oixeBa vvv an opinion of some kind about 
 
 nakdaKicrdivTes ; these things, use all their might 
 
 9. 7-oOro npaTTovaiv] Sc. to make it appear that they 
 
 fiifiovvrai. have in them that which an- 
 
 13. piprjpa] The result is swers to their own opinion, 
 
 again substituted for the act, impersonating this in actions 
 
 as in ye'wTjfxa supra 267 a. and words as far as they can V 
 
 17. to axwu] Governed by /it- Cf. Rep. 2, 365 c : npoQvpa piv 
 povvrat implied in what follows. Kai (rx^pa kvk\<o irep\ ipavrbv 
 
 1 8. ap ovk — pip.ovp.evoi ;] "Is aKiaypcKplav dpeTrjs TrepiypanTeov. 
 
scnmsths. 
 
 189 
 
 367. di>ai Bikcliol pLrjBapLcos bvTes ; r) tovtov ttolv tov- 
 volvtlov ; 
 
 geai. mv. 
 
 cl S*E. M.ifjL7)Tr)v Br) tovtov ye eTepov eKelvov XeKTeov 
 
 olfJLOLl, TOV ayVOOVVTOL TOV ytyVCDO-KOVTOS. \ 
 
 0EAI. Nat. 
 
 SE. Ylodev ovv ovopta i/carepcD T19 clvtcov XtyeTai 
 irpeirov ; r) BtjXov By yaXeirbv ov, Blotl ttjs twv 
 yevcov kolt etBrj Biaipecrecos iraXaia 77?, a>? eoiKev, 
 
 instance, 
 who per- 
 sonate their 
 own notion 
 
 of justice, 
 
 without 
 
 knowing 
 
 what jus- 
 tice really 
 is. For 
 this branch 
 of mimicry, 
 through 
 the remiss- 
 ness of the 
 first name- 
 givers, it is 
 
 >/~v /1 \>/ «■» a o,» difficult 
 
 cuTia tol9 epnrpoauev Kan acrvvvovs 7raprju, coaTe ptrjo 10 10 find a 
 hriyeipeiv prjBeva BicupelcrOaL' kclOo Br) tcov ovopLaTcov "Motion 
 avayKX] \xr) o~(j)6Bpa eviropelv. opicos Be, kclv el ToXprj- "i'^S 
 poTepov elprjaOat, diayvcoo-eco? evena tt)v p.ev pteTa ^a^Ti 
 e B6£r)? pLiprjcriv Bo£opLipLr)TiKr)v 7rpocreL7ra>pLev, Tr)v Be j^eitiiei 
 
 pLeT eTTLO-TrjpLr]? \cTTOplKr]V TIVCL pLlpLrjaiV. ^whenTh 
 
 GEAI. "Eo-TCO. mimic is 
 
 unconsci 
 
 5?E. QaTepCp TOLVVV XPy°" r * 0V ' ° 7<Zp O-0(f>lOTr)S pus of hi 
 
 OVK e.V TOl? elBoaLV f)v, dXX eV TOW pLipLOVpLe- ordissei 
 
 VOLS Br). thedisse 
 
 bling no 
 0EAI. K.GU piaXa. 20 tion-min 
 
 i. nr]8aiia>s ovrei] An under- 
 current of strong feeling is per- 
 ceptible here and in o-obodpa 
 supra, as in Kep. 7, 531 e : ov 
 yap ttov doKovai aoi oi ravra teivol 
 BiaXeKTiKol eivai. Ov p.a tov At", 
 e<prj, el pfj p.d\a ye rives oXiyoi ois 
 eyco evTervxqKa. 
 
 9. irakaia — iraprjv] Ancient, 
 and therefore hard to discover 
 — void of reflection, or com- 
 prehensive thought, and there- 
 fore without principles. Com- 
 pare Bacon's complaint of the 
 vagueness of common language 
 
 about physical qualities. 
 
 IO. davvvovs] Cf. Legg. 7, 
 799 e : Kadcnrep oi naXaiol Tore 
 7rep\ Kidapmdiav ovtco ttcos, cos eoi- 
 Kev, covopLacrav, coo~Te Tax av ovo ^ 
 inelvoL Travraivao-i y dcpecrrcoTes 
 elev tov vvv \eyop.evov, nad' vttvov 
 8e oiov Ttov tls r) ko\ vnap eyprj- 
 yopcos coveipco^e p.avTevop.evos avro. 
 
 1 8. ovk iv toIs eldocjiv fjv\ P. 
 
 233 d. 
 
 dXX' iv — Br)] " But he does 
 appear amongst the class of 
 imitators." 
 
190 
 
 IIAATQNOS 
 
 dissembles 
 before a 
 multitude ; 
 the other, 
 which 
 makes a 
 False im- 
 pression Oil 
 individuals 
 by means 
 of Eristic 
 argument : 
 in other 
 words, 
 the clap- 
 trap orator, 
 and — the 
 Sophist : 
 
 alS)]pov, e'/re vynjs elre diTrXorjv £'t t\wv Tiva Iutiv p. 26; 
 ev iavrco. 
 
 0EAI. 2/co7rw/xez/. 
 
 SE. "^X €L T0LVVV KaL P-dXa GvyyrjV. 6 fxev yap 
 5€vr)0r)s clvtwv icrTiv, olofievo? eidevai ravra a do^d^EL' p. 26^ 
 to 8e Oarepov o~)(r]jjLa 8lo. ttjv Iv T0I9 Xoyois kvXlv- 
 8r]o-ii> e'x<Ei ttoXXtjv v7ro\j/lav koll (pofiov a>9 dyvoei 
 Tavra a 7rpo? tov? aXXovs (hs eidoo? icrx^fiaTiaTaL. 
 
 GEAI. Yldvv fj.€v ovv ecmv tKarepov yevovs d>v 
 10 tiprjKas. 
 
 HE. Ovkovv tov pt.lv dirXovv fUfirjTTjv Tiva, tov 8e 
 elpcoviKOv pLLfirjTrjv Orjaofxev ; 
 
 GEAI. Et/coy yovv. 
 
 SE. Tovrov 5' av to ykvos ev y dvo (f)a!)fxev ; 
 15 GEAI. "Opa av. 
 
 HE. 2/co7rco, /cat jjlol SiTTGo KaTa(paivea06v Tive' b 
 tov fxev 8rj/ioaia re kcu piaKpoh Xoyois irpos irXrjOr) 
 dvvaTOV elpcoveveaOai KaOopco, tov Se ioia re, koll 
 
 1. e'lre SwrXoV ] Various 
 figures are employed to give 
 greater vividness to the notion 
 of division. Cf. supr. 229 b. 
 
 Polit. 259 d : av apa iv avrrj 
 Tiva 8ia(pvrjv KaTavorjO'aip.ev. lb. 
 
 260 : Oeareov e'l tttj SiecrTrjKe. lb. 
 
 261 : e'l Tiva TOfirjv en e\op.ev vtt- 
 eluovarav iv tovtco. Phsedr. 268a: 
 el apa kol crot (paiverai 8ieo~TT)Kos 
 avTuv to r/Tpiov &o~nep epoi. 
 
 5. avrcov] t<ov do^ofiip.r]Ta)P. 
 
 6. to 8e Qmepov o-^ripa — io'X 1 !' 
 
 p,a.Tio-Tai\ " But it is part of 
 the form in which the other 
 appears that from the constant 
 practice of discussion he cannot 
 but suspect and fear that he 
 is ignorant of the things which 
 
 he wears the appearance before 
 other men of knowing." " There 
 is in his attitude an unmis- 
 takeable air of misgiving and 
 fear." 
 
 KvXiv8rjo-iv] Cf. Theset. 172 c: 
 
 01 iv tiKao-TTjpiois Kal toIs toiov- 
 tois eK veav Kv\iv8ovp,evoi. 
 
 9. i'o-Tiv — eip^Kas] "There 
 certainly is a character belong- 
 ing to each of the two kinds 
 you have described." Or 6 
 
 dogopip,. ecrriv eKaTepov yevovs. 
 
 12. elpaviKov] " Hollow, in- 
 sincere, designing." elpapinos 
 occurs again (and again in a 
 bad sense) in Legg. io, 908 e. 
 
 18. 18 ia re] Sc. elpaveveadai 
 
20M2TH2. 
 
 191 
 
 \68.fipa)(€(ri Xoyois dvayKa^ovra rov TrpoaBiaXtyopLtvov 
 evavrioXoye'iv avrov avrcp. 
 
 0EAI. Aeyeis opOorara. 
 
 SE. Tlva ovv a7ro(Pau>co/jL€0a rov fiaKpoXoycorepov 
 elvaL ; irorepa woXltikov rj drj/xoXoytKov ; 5 
 
 0EAI. Ayp.oAoyLK.6v. 
 
 SE, T/ Se rov erepov epovjuev ; ao(f)ov ?} ao(f)i- 
 
 (TTIKOV ; 
 
 0EAI. *To* /xeV 7T0i» <ro(pou dSvvarov, iTreiirep ovk 
 c ei^ora avrov edep,€v' pupi-qrys 5' <bj; roi5 crocpov SrjXov io 
 OTi 7rapa>vvpLiov avrov ri Xr]\j/erai, kou a)(e8ov rjdr) 
 fi€/j.dd7]Ka on rovrov Be? irpocremfiv aXr)6m avrov 
 e\e?vov rov iravrairacnv ovrws aotyicrrriv. 
 
 3E. Ovkovv avvdrjaofiev avrov, KaOdirep epnrpo- 
 crOev, rovvofia o-vfMrXe^avres 1 diro reAevrrj? eV'15 
 dpxqv ; 
 
 2. ivavTioXoyelv] It now ap- 
 pears how much of the claim 
 advanced in p. 231 a is granted 
 to the Sophist. He is allowed 
 to possess that portion of the 
 Eristic art which is not based 
 on knowledge, but on the prac- 
 tice of argument. Cf. also 
 p. 225 d, e. 
 
 9, *T6*] MSS. t6v. Ste- 
 phanus, followed by the other 
 editors, corrected this into to, 
 with great probability. 
 
 11. TrapuvvfiLov] The vague- 
 ness of this derivation renders 
 it more correct than Hegel's 
 from the imaginary o-oQifriv, 
 " to make wise," or Bentham's, 
 who took o-o^icrrTjj for a super- 
 lative. 
 
 12. [iefj.a6r]Ka\ " I now clearly 
 understand that this is he whom 
 I must address as the very man 
 
 of whom we are in search, the 
 unmistakeably real and genuine 
 Sophist." 
 
 avrbv eReivov] There is 
 again a transition from the 
 name to the thing. 
 
 14. KaQairep epTrpoo-Qev] P. 226 
 a. For dirb TeXevrrjs ilf dp^rjv, 
 
 cf. Legg. 1, 768 e: ttjv d.p^y]v 
 
 vvv reAevrfl Trpoaafyas. 
 
 By the process of division 
 the Sophist is thrust down into 
 the lowest sphere of imitative 
 (i. e. unreal) art, much in the 
 same way in which pleasure 
 finds the lowest place in the 
 Philebus ; and poetry, in Rep. 
 10, is thrice removed from 
 truth (597 e), where there is 
 also the same division of di- 
 vine and human art. So the 
 actual Politicians are found 
 low down amongst the class of 
 
192 
 
 nAATONOS 20<M2TH2. 
 
 genealogy 
 is now 
 complete. 
 
 0EAI. Ylavv ph ovv. P- 26S. 
 
 SE. Tov 81] rrjs evavTioTroioXoytKrj? eiptoviKOv 
 fiepovs rrj9 8o$jao-TiKrj? fiifirjTiKov, tov tyavTacrTiKov 
 yevovs airo Trj? €i8(oXo7rouKr)? ov Oelov aXK avOpco- d 
 5 7riKov rrj9 iroir)(T6(x)s ucfxopia/ievov iv Xoyots to 6av- 
 
 fXaTOTTOUKOV /JLOpLOV, TCtVTr)? TYjS ytveOLS T€ KCU CCl/JLaTO? 
 
 oy av <Pfi tov ovtco? ao(f)io-Tr]i> uvea, TaXr)OeaTaTa, wy 
 eoiKev, epei. 
 
 0EAI. YlavTOLTracrL /xev ovv. 
 
 servants (Polit. 289 d), and in 
 the series of transmigrations 
 given in the Phsedrus, 248 e, 
 the eighth place (between the 
 artificer and the tyrant) is as- 
 signed to the life of the So- 
 phist or the public man. 
 
 2. T6i> 8rj] I have ven- 
 tured to retain top against 
 Schleierniacher, who reads to, 
 and to give dcpapio-pevov a 
 middle signification. " The 
 artist of the contradiction-caus- 
 ing, conscious section of un- 
 knowing mimicry, who has 
 taken for his own the word- 
 juggling portion of human, not 
 divine, creation, in the phan- 
 tastic species of likeness-mak- 
 ing, such undeniably is the 
 lineage of the true Sophist." 
 
 Cf. SUpr. 267 b, dnoveipapeda. 
 
 4. dvdpamiKov, though hardly 
 occurring elsewhere in Plato, 
 may be regarded as probably 
 genuine, because of the affec- 
 tation of variety and novelty 
 of diction which pervades the 
 dialogue. 
 
 5. The Bodl. MS. has Bavpa- 
 
 fTTOTroirjubv, not 8avp.aT0TV0irjTi.KbVj 
 
 as Gaisford asserts. 
 
 6. TavTTjs ttjs — at/xaros] The 
 words of Glaucus. II. Z. 211 : 
 
 tovttjs toi yeverjs Te Ka\ atparos 
 
 evxopai eivai. The derivation 
 of kind from kind by 8taipeo-is 
 is compared to a genealogy. 
 Compare the modern idea of 
 the genealogical derivation of 
 species from a single type, and 
 cf. Rep. 8, 547 a : TavTrjs toi 
 yeveds xpl ^dvai eivai o~tclo~w. 
 
n O A I T I K o s 
 
INTRODUCTION TO THE STATESMAN. 
 
 llIE contrast between the Sophist and the Philosopher is 
 paralleled by that between the ideal and actual Statesman. 
 The one of these is the philosopher under a different aspect, 
 surveying from above and yet guiding the life of states : the 
 other, in Plato's view, is the most sophistical of all sophists 
 
 (tOV TTCLVTtoV <TO(f)L<TT5>V \xkyMTTOV yOT]Ta KCU TaVTTJS TtjS T^XVTjS 6/X- 
 
 TrtLpoTaTov). But in the present inquiry, although this thought 
 may be detected from the first (see 258 b and note, compared 
 with 292 b), it is ironically kept back, and instead of starting 
 from the known characteristics of a class of persons, the speakers 
 begin by forming an a priori conception of what the States- 
 man ought to be. In fact, this dialogue, in a different subject- 
 matter, combines the problem of the Sophistes with that of the 
 Philosophus, and seeks to determine, not only an existing coun- 
 terfeit, but an ideal reality. At the same time it is shewn that 
 the true Statesman and Governor cannot be defined without 
 reference to the actual, mixed conditions of human things. The 
 whole is intended by the author to be a study in scientific 
 method. 
 
 Further remarks on the dialogue will be better understood 
 if they are prefaced with, a brief outline of the dialogue itself. 
 
 § 1. It is assumed that the Statesman is master of a science : 
 and that not a mere handicraft in which the thought cannot 
 be separated from the work, but a theory, which however, as 
 a theory of government, has an immediate reference to prac- 
 tice. This theory must be essentially the same whether applied 
 to a state or a household, and whether he who holds it be 
 invested with authority or not. Further, the commands of the 
 Statesman are not derivative, but issue from himself. These 
 *b2 
 
i> INTRODUCTION 
 
 commands aim at controlling a work which affects living crea- 
 tures in the aggregate. But what living creatures '( The 
 respondent inclines to say " man" at once. But he is warned 
 to be cautious, lest lie be making " a distinction without a 
 difference." For what ground is there for supposing that the 
 distinction between man and the brutes is more rational than 
 that between Greek and Barbarian, or that man has more 
 right than any other thinking animal, such as the crane, to 
 set himself over against all other creatures ? By gradual sub- 
 divisions, much as in the game called " Animal, vegetable, and 
 mineral, 1 ' the human race is at last determined to be the sphere 
 of statesmanship : mankind being in the last place distinguished 
 by a merely mathematical and physical difference from the 
 pig, or, as bipes implume, from the novcpovouv (\>v\a dpvidoov. 
 (258 b — 267 c.) 
 
 § 2. The King, then, has been denned as the herdsman, 
 the nurturer or nourisher of men. But there now appears 
 this difference between the king and other herdsmen, that, while 
 the cowherd is everything to his own cattle, there are many 
 others who, equally with the king, may claim to be the shep- 
 herds of the human flock. The merchant, husbandman, baker, 
 gymnast, physician, have all a share in their nurture. In order 
 to perceive the reason of this difference we must call to our 
 assistance an ancient tale. 
 
 There has been, and will be again, a time when the king is 
 the shepherd of his people, but not in the present cycle of the 
 world's life. For there are alternate cycles, during one of which 
 the universe is guided by the Divine hand, and then again, 
 through many ages, the vast round fabric is left to revolve 
 alone. Of the former time we have a dim tradition in the 
 fables of the golden age and of the earth-born seed : and in 
 the latter we and our fathers have been living. Of this " re- 
 verse of doom" a trace remains in the story that Zeus once 
 made the sun and the stars to return from their setting to 
 their rising. The gifts of Triptolemus and Demeter, Prome- 
 theus, Hephaestus and Athene, were rendered necessary by 
 the naked and helpless state of man, when first left, with the 
 whole universe, to his own guidance. For in that former state 
 he lived under the care of a Divine shepherd, who was all- 
 sufficient for his flock : happy if they used their golden hours 
 
TO THE STATESMAN. v 
 
 in the improvement of their reason : otherwise, less happy 
 than we may be. How great, then, was our error, when we 
 mistook the Statesman, who is a man of like nurture and 
 education with hia citizens, for the Deity who ruled and tended 
 mankind under the perfect conditions of that former cycle, 
 when all things, including man himself, sprang of themselves 
 from the Earth, and hence there was no property nor any 
 possession of wives and children. And there is another error 
 of less moment which the tale makes clear. Our definition is 
 at once too wide and too narrow : too wide, because including 
 more than the Statesman ; too narrow, because not including 
 him at all. He is not the feeder of his people, though he 
 has the care of them. The word "care" would have included 
 him also. But the general name "care of herds" must be 
 divided until the King or Statesman is separated from all 
 rivals and left quite alone. 
 
 First, he is distinguished from the shepherd of the theo- 
 cracy ; next, from the tyrant, who rules by force. The King 
 or Statesman has the care of willing bipeds. (267 c — 276 e.) 
 
 § 3. Still, even with the help of our tale, which grew upon 
 our hands, we have made an unfinished work. This descrip- 
 tion is a mere colourless sketch, which must be filled up by 
 further argument. And for this purpose we must have 
 recourse to an example. For as children in learning to read 
 are taught to recognize the letters of words which they know 
 not, by being shewn the same letters in words which they 
 know, so the mind is taught the principles of things, which 
 having seen in one form she fails to recognise in others more 
 strange and complicated. This will be illustrated by the 
 example which is now to be chosen. 
 
 The art of weaving woollen cloth is one of the simplest we 
 eould name. Yet we might describe it by a long series of 
 divisions, distinguishing it from the making of other fabrics 
 and coverings, without, after all, separating it from those arts 
 to which it is most nearly related. For suppose we had thus 
 defined it as " the art of working in wool." Is there not the 
 process of carding, which is the opposite of weaving together, 
 and those of spinning and fulling and of darning, all of which 
 answer to the definition but are none of them included in the 
 weaver's art ? Then there is the making of the loom and 
 
vi INTRODUCTION 
 
 shuttle and other implements of weaving, which are adminicular 
 to the art but different from the art itself. 
 
 We distinguish; then, arts instrumental from arts operative. 
 And of arts operative in wool-working there is a further dis- 
 tinction, also depending on a universal division of the arts 
 into combining and discriminating. Discriminating processes 
 in wool-working are carding and one part of the use of the 
 comb. But wool is combined, (i) By twisting: either hard 
 with the spindle, to make the warp, or softly with the hand; 
 to make the woof. (2) By the crossing and intertexture of 
 the warp and woof, which is weaving. (277 a — 283 a.) 
 
 § 3 b. Now it may be said that "this is too long;'''' and 
 that we might have arrived at the definition without the 
 intermediate steps. 
 
 This leads us into a digression on Excess and Defect. For 
 want of dialectic, men are apt to confuse that which is more 
 with that which is too much. Whereas there are two ways 
 of measuring size and number ; one, simply by comparison of 
 greater and less, the other, by reference to the standard of 
 what is meet or proper. Without such a standard there could 
 be no art or science. This is the real meaning of the saying 
 that the science of measurement embraces all things. 
 
 So lamentable are the results of an unphilosophic method. 
 And this suggests the further reflection, that as each reading 
 lesson is learnt, not for its own sake, but for the sake of learn- 
 ing to read; so our present inquiry is not so much on account 
 of the Statesman as for our improvement in dialectic and in 
 the alphabet of the ideal world. 
 
 From all which we gather that the length of our discussion 
 is to be judged, not by comparison, but by its meetness or 
 fitness : and this not with a view to pleasure, nor chiefly to the 
 ease or rapidity with which the object of search is found, but 
 by its meetness or fitness to improve men in dialectic and 
 awaken in them the faculty of invention. (283 b — 287 a.) 
 
 § 3 c. We now endeavour to apply our example to the dis- 
 covery of the King. His art is to be separated from those, 
 adminicular and operative, which, like his own, are necessary 
 to the life of the city. 
 
 The productions of these are divided into seven kinds, viz. 
 instruments, vessels, seats, shelters, sports, nourishments, and 
 
TO THE STATESMAN. vii 
 
 materials: in none of which is the king's work discoverable. 
 Next in the order of possessions come tamo animals of every 
 kind, the art of herding which, including men, has been 
 already distinguished from that of the king. Lastly, there is 
 the class of slaves and other servants, amongst whom, strangely, 
 appears the first glimpso of a character rivalling the king. 
 Not amongst the slaves, of course, nor amongst tradesmen 
 (though there is a political science of trade), nor heralds and 
 other ministers of state. But first the prophet, herald of the 
 Gods, and the priest who mediates between earth and heaven, 
 have a kingly air. In Egypt the king must be a priest, and 
 the Archon-Basileus at Athens performs sacred rites. 
 
 At last our eye has caught the stragglers of a tumultuous 
 throng, who presently sweep into full view — the actual rivals 
 of the King. (287 b — 290 c) 
 
 § 4. A motley crew, and monstrous to the philosopher's eye. 
 Some fierce and cruel as centaurs, some weak but cunning. 
 These greatest impostors of all sophists do the business of the 
 state : but, though hard the task, they must be separated 
 from the true Statesman and King. For of the three forms 
 of government ordinarily recognized, Monarchy, Democracy, 
 Oligarchy, with the additional branches of Tyranny and Aristo- 
 cracy, can it be said that any one is determined by Eeason? 
 How can the difference of many, few or one, of poor or rich, 
 or even that which we have recognized between persuasion 
 and force, distinguish the knowing from the ignorant ruler? 
 True,, many cannot have this knowledge, nor can that rude 
 multitude who call themselves the wealthy or the few. Those 
 who are indeed the few, whether poor or rich, whether they 
 rule by force or by persuasion, whether with or without law, 
 and by whatever means, so long as they rule with knowledge 
 for the good of the state, are the true rulers, and theirs is the 
 true form of government. Those forms to which the name is 
 given are imitations, better or worse, of this one form. (291 a 
 —293 e.) 
 
 § 4 b. The Greek mind is shocked by the suggestion that 
 the true government may be without law. But the sove- 
 reignty of law is not a perfect substitute for that of a wise 
 and living will. For general rules, which are in their na- 
 ture simple, cannot embrace every contingency which may 
 
viii [NTRODUCTION 
 
 arise in the inlinitc complexity of human tilings. The law, 
 like Croon, 
 
 tv yOos ijlovvov €i> avTu r/jopei 
 
 co? (j)i](Ttv avros, Kovbev ak\o, tovt opflcos ^eiv. 
 
 Laws are necessary (like rules in the gymnasium), because 
 the ruler is not able at every moment to be prescribing for 
 individual cases : and also because the lawgiver will not always 
 be with his people. But suppose a physician going into a far 
 country, and writing memoranda for his patients to observe 
 until his return : should he come back and find that from 
 some change of climate his prescriptions are no longer suitable, 
 must he be bound by what he has once written ? And if the 
 true legislator, or one like him, were to come again on earth, 
 must he be bound by the letter of the old precepts? It is 
 commonly said, ' Let a man persuade his city, and so let him 
 improve the laws/ But and if he forces a better law upon his 
 countrymen, will he be any the less a good lawgiver ? The truth 
 is, that, whether poor or rich, whether with or without law, 
 whether by persuasion or force, the true statesman is he who 
 governs Avisely, who does what is expedient, and preserves and 
 makes better those committed to his care. (293 e — 397 b.) 
 
 § 4 c. It was said above, that of the imitations of the true 
 government some were better, others worse. Here the distinc- 
 tion finds place which we before rejected, between the obser- 
 vation and neglect of law. In the absence of the true sove- 
 reign, it is best for every state to preserve its laws, which 
 it may be presumed that the first lawgiver made after his 
 conception of the ideal pattern. This is illustrated by an 
 imaginary case (with evident allusion to Athens). Suppose 
 that men, from their experience of the wickedness of physi- 
 cians and pilots, determined to bind them by edicts, which 
 they passed in their assembly or in their senate, at the sug- 
 gestion of any unprofessional adviser who chose to speak, and 
 regulated thereby the use of drugs and surgical instruments 
 and the build and navigation of ships in peace and war. Sup- 
 pose these edicts engraved on lasting marble, and on the no 
 less lasting monuments of custom and tradition. Suppose, 
 further, that our medical practitioners and naval captains were 
 chosen annually in the same assembly, and were liable to be 
 
TO THE STATESMAN. ix 
 
 indicted publicly by any citizen so soon as their annual term 
 expired. A further sanction would be necessary. Were any 
 found searching into the truth of navigation and medicine 
 beyond what was written, he must first be set down by public 
 opinion as a babbling, star-gazing sophist, and then accused in 
 court of corrupting the youth : and if convicted of persuading 
 any man to sail or to be healed contrary to the customs, he 
 must suffer the last penalty : seeing that no man must be 
 wiser than the laws, which he who runs may read. 
 
 The result would be the hopeless extinction of these arts, 
 and of any others to which this plan should be applied. Yet 
 is a worse case conceivable : if, when the laws of any art had 
 been thus laid down, those elected by suffrage or by lot were 
 to despise the laws and act in defiance of them, not from the 
 knowledge of any principle, but for the sake of gain or favour. 
 For though the arts were destroyed, there was in the former 
 case a certain ground of experience or probability, which is 
 thus annihilated. 
 
 Hence in the absence of the true lawgiver, the best course 
 (though only a second best) is to maintain the laws. 
 
 This distinction, between constitutional and unconstitutional 
 government, was previously applied to monarchy and oligarchy, 
 and is now extended to democracy. Whence there are now 
 seven so-called forms of government, of which one only de- 
 serves the name : — scientific monarchy, constitutional mon- 
 archy, tyranny, aristocracy, oligarchy, constitutional demo- 
 cracy, unconstitutional democracy. When we contemplate the 
 six last named, the wonder is that cities should exist at all. 
 Constitutional monarchy is better than aristocracy, and this is 
 better than constitutional democracy. Of the remaining three, 
 unconstitutional democracy, or anarchy, is the least bad, and 
 tyranny is the worst of all. 
 
 But all are to be rejected, as not answering to the object of 
 our search. The heads of these false governments are not 
 statesmen but partisans ; they are mere phantasms, like the 
 constitutions which they administer ; the most egregious imita- 
 tors, impostors, and sophists. (297 c — 303 b.) 
 
 § 5. The actual statesmen being thus disposed of, the way 
 is still further cleared towards the unveiling of the true king. 
 Yet all that we have hitherto gained is negative, except that 
 *c 
 
x INTRODUCTION 
 
 lie rules men wisely, according to true principles. Like refiners 
 of gold, we have purged away baser minerals, but have not 
 yet eliminated those precious metals which have the strongest 
 affinity for the gold. In other words, our definition would 
 apply equally to the general, the judge, the wise and eloquent 
 orator, as to the king. 
 
 But the art of statecraft has this distinguishing note, that it 
 directs the functions of the rest, and has a universal working. 
 The orator knows how to persuade, the judge how incor- 
 ruptibly to administer the law, the general how to conduct 
 war successfully : but none except the king or statesman can 
 determine where persuasion is to be used instead of force, 
 what the law ought to be, whether war is to be levied, or 
 peace preserved. Thus statecraft is, as was before anticipated, 
 the commanding science, not herself acting, but directing those 
 who have the power to act. And while each of the rest has 
 a particular sphere, the office of the king embraces every func- 
 tion of the common life. (303 c — 305 e.) 
 
 We have now separated the king or statesman from all who 
 were likely to be confounded with him. It remains, in accord- 
 ance with our example, to describe the manner of his work. 
 What are the warp and woof of the royal fabric ? and how is 
 it woven ? 
 
 First, we must note that there are two opposite qualities 
 which merit praise, courage and gentleness, or, in other words, 
 quickness and slowness : which, however, if they remain apart 
 run to excess, and equally become blameable and even de- 
 structive. Next, that every art of combination, even the 
 humblest, seeks to bring together elements which have first 
 been separated from what is worthless. Hence as the art 
 of carding ministered to weaving, so the kingly art makes use 
 of education and other tests for purging the good from the bad. 
 The worst are cast forth by exile or death. The mean and 
 ignorant are enslaved. Of the rest, the brave and gentle, that 
 is the hard warp and soft woof, are combined : the eternal part 
 being compacted with a divine, the mortal with a human, bond. 
 The divine bond is right opinion confirmed by reason, and this 
 is implanted in the mind — the divines particula aura? — thus 
 imparting gentleness to the rugged and prudence to the smooth 
 and yielding nature. 
 
TO THE STATESMAN. xi 
 
 This is the most important and difficult branch of the ruling 
 science. The human bonds are easily imposed where the di- 
 vine exist. They arc the regulations concerning marriage, 
 whereby the brave and gentle races are physically as well 
 as mentally crossed and interwoven : though flesh and blood 
 may find this saying hard. 
 
 This having been effected, the offices of state are to be 
 distributed amongst both kinds : the two natures being in 
 each case either united in a single person, or equally repre- 
 sented where more than one officer is required : that the state 
 may act at once with energy and discretion. 
 
 And so there is wrought the perfect web, whereby the true 
 Statesman holds the whole city together in concord and amity, 
 and secures for his subjects the happiest life which is possible 
 for a society of men. (305 e — 311.) 
 
 REMARKS. 
 
 I. Dialectical Aspects. Relation to the Sophist. 
 
 Amongst many differences of treatment which might be 
 expected from the change of subject and the fertility of Plato's 
 invention, the thoughts on method and the nature of know- 
 ledge, which were thrown out in the Sophist, are not forgotten, 
 but indirectly receive further development. 
 
 a. The process of divisions has acquired new significance. 
 The problem is explained to be, "to distinguish one kind of art 
 from all others, and by stamping these with a single negative 
 form, learn to conceive of all science under two heads, namely, 
 statecraft, and that science which is not statecraft." (258 c.) 
 This is clearly an application of the view of Not-Being which 
 had just been given. But it soon appears that the mere 
 abstract notion of Difference may be capriciously applied. To 
 distinguish man from other animals, for example, or Greek 
 from Barbarian, is a merely arbitrary procedure, unless we 
 have found a rational ground for the distinction, which can 
 only be done by a method of successive exclusions, each of 
 which implies a certain knowledge of that which is excluded, 
 as well as of that which is retained. Even so meagre a defi- 
 nition of man as that he is a featherless biped implies the 
 *c 2 
 
v.. INTRODUCTION 
 
 knowledge of at least two positive qualities of the class of 
 birds. This thought is not worked out further at the time, 
 but in the later stages of the argument the complexity of all 
 real knowledge, implied already in the " communion of ideas," 
 is more fully recognised than elsewhere in Plato. The defi- 
 nition of the Sun which Socrates on the previous day hail 
 thought sufficient, " that he is the brightest orb that rolls in 
 Heaven about the earth," on to Xa^-pdrarov ecrrt t&v Kara 
 tov ovpavbv Iovtgov irepl yijv (Thenat. 208 d), would not now 
 satisfy the requirements of the Stranger. " It is not enough 
 to describe wool-weaving as the greatest and fairest of all 
 ministries that wait on the working of wool : the other 
 attendant arts must be carefully stripped from round it." 
 (281 c.) That is, each of these must be so far defined as to 
 exclude weaving. The boundary line must be clearly drawn 
 from either side. And thus the definition of the Statesman 
 involves a certain account of the general, the judge, the orator, 
 as well as a description of the no-constitutions of existing states. 
 Here is an approach, though a very partial one, to the ideal 
 of science which is made a test of the happiness or misery 
 of the children of earth in Saturn's reign : " learning from 
 every nature, what each by its proper faculty had perceived 
 differently from others and could contribute to the treasury 
 of knowledge." (272 c.) 
 
 So much has been gained from perceiving the correlation 
 of the positive and negative elements of knowledge. Closely 
 akin to this was the reaction, which the " Sophist" justified 11 , 
 from a merely negative and analytical method of knowledge. 
 This also is continued in the Statesman. In their zeal for 
 the method of divisions, the Stranger and his respondent fall 
 into a natural error. In seeking to be definite they forget to 
 be comprehensive, and omit a needful generalization. They 
 divide the science of feeding ; whereas the king in this pre- 
 sent cycle is not a feeder, although he has the care of a 
 flock. This error is duly exposed and rectified ; and it is 
 further shewn that the distinctions hitherto made have only 
 brought out a colourless outline of the King. It is from this 
 point that the more serious portion of the inquiry begins. 
 
 a TeKeaiTarri lravroiv Xoywv £<tt\v atpdviais to §«xx'<-'P' / C e " / eKaiTTov anb ■navrwv. 
 Soph. 259 e. 
 
TO THE STATESMAN. xiii 
 
 b. The generalizing or combining process b , the defect of 
 which had been just noticed, here resumes its proper import- 
 ance. The ideas on which the definition of the Statesman mainly 
 turns arc drawn from the not very obvious example of cloth- 
 weaving; and an example is explained to mean the illustra- 
 tion of some great or unfamiliar truth by the exhibition of the 
 leading principles of that truth in a simple and familiar case. 
 We are again reminded of the complexity of the world of 
 which philosophy speaks to us, and how combinations which 
 in the abstract are sufficiently understood, become lost when 
 we endeavour to follow the concrete development of things. 
 (278 c, d.) We are told that it is only by dialectic (not by 
 any sensible mean) that the similitude of the highest truths 
 can be displayed. And as the definition of the weaver is 
 symbolical of that of the Statesman ; so the chief value of this 
 whole discussion is to shadow forth still higher truths than 
 those with which it is concerned. (285 d, e.) 
 
 What then are the principles suggested by the present 
 example ? First, we are taught the inadequacy of the method 
 of dichotomies as hitherto pursued. If the view of this 
 method already stated is correct, we can easily imagine that 
 Young Socrates, or let us rather say a pupil of the Academy 
 at this time, was not prepared for the elaborateness of the 
 discussion. In fact we have seen him beguiled by the Stranger 
 into thinking that the journey was ended, when it was not yet 
 well begun. (265 b.) Plato here shews that the real work of 
 distinction and comparison, which deserves the name of dialec- 
 tic, is a more subtle process and goes deeper than the boyish 
 exercise with which he had as it were broken ground for the 
 inquiry : though even through this many valuable hints had 
 been conveyed, seria mista jocis. The difference in this 
 respect between the earlier and later portions of the dialogue 
 will be evident to any one who compares the abstract notion 
 of statesmanship as a commanding theory in p. 260 a, with 
 the view given in pp. 305, 306 of the relation of the kingly 
 art to those of the orator, judge, and field-officer. Those 
 
 b (rvvaywyr]. Cf. 278 c, rabrhv eV pare Bacon's saying, "The strength of 
 
 krtpqi Stto-n-cKTuevu, 5o£a£6/j.evov opd&s all sciences is, as the strength of the 
 
 Kal <njvax0€v. old man's faggot, in the bond." 
 
 c See General Introduction. Com- 
 
xiv INTRODUCTION 
 
 who make this comparison will not think that the author of 
 (his dialogue believed his definition of bipea implume to be a 
 serious contribution to the science of human nature. As the 
 dialogue proceeds the earlier divisions seem to be forgotten, 
 or to be neglected as a mere scaffolding (l , else the analogy 
 just noticed between p. 260 a and 305 d (ovk avryv Set Ttpar- 
 Ti.iv, dAA' apyj.iv tG>v bvvajxevwv TipaTTtiv) could hardly have 
 been overlooked by the speakers themselves. 
 
 The imperfection of mere external classifications being thus 
 recognized, there follows the remark, already quoted, on the 
 necessity of finding the mutual boundary between the object of 
 search and all kindred species. (281 c.) 
 
 In applying this to weaving we obtain two fresh thoughts, 
 which are found valuable for the main argument : the distinc- 
 tion of atria and ^vvaina, of operative and adminicular arts ; 
 and the universality of the two great sciences of composition 
 and division. 
 
 The former affords the hint for the elimination from the 
 work of the king of various arts, without which civil life could 
 not proceed : the latter is the key-note of the final passage, in 
 which the last touches are given to the image of the King. 
 For by help of our example we are enabled to proceed fur- 
 ther, even after all possible distinctions have been drawn : and 
 when all rival arts have been stripped away we see in the 
 royal function the twofold process of division and composition : 
 division, by which, practically, good citizens are selected, 
 and theoretically the brave and gentle elements are distin- 
 guished : composition, by which the diverse materials thus 
 cleansed and prepared are combined in a smooth and perfect 
 web. These two are the counterpart of the twofold process of 
 dialectic, by which the objects of thought are distinguished 
 and combined according to truth. This process is incidentally 
 described in a passage of the Politicus already quoted (285 
 a, b), in which the complex determinations of real knowledge 
 are contrasted with the off-hand generalizations and distinc- 
 tions of sciolism ; and which is in fact an application and 
 development of the conception of scientific method expressed 
 in Soph. 259 d. 
 
 d Cf. Phsedr. 265 d : tb p.\v &\\a rw ovti 7rai5ia TreiraiaQai. 
 
TO THE STATESMAN. w 
 
 c. These arc the chief points of that instruction in dialectic, 
 which is commended to us by the Elcatic Stranger as the most 
 valuable result of the dialogue. We may gather from them 
 that Plato was at this time striving after a philosophy of the 
 concrete, and endeavouring to substitute real and fruitful in- 
 quiry for the barren logical excrcitations, the sweeping gene- 
 ralizations and verbal distinctions of his contemporaries, per- 
 haps of his own scholars. The aim constantly held before the 
 mind is the attainment of greater definitcness and fulness. 
 " This is true, but not explicit or complete " (aA?/0es jue*> ov jj,i]v 
 adepts ye ovbe rikeov) is the repeated complaint. Since it has 
 been proved in the Sophist that different ideas may have com- 
 munion or correlation with each other, it becomes the task of 
 philosophy to discern the threads which connect them. And 
 nowhere, except in the Philebus and Parmenides, has Plato 
 buckled to this task more earnestly. In the latter part of the 
 Phaedrus indeed there is a conception of an art of rhetoric, 
 which should be based on a complete science of psychology, 
 the realization of which would far exceed in definiteness and 
 completeness this somewhat desultory sketch. But it is one 
 thing to imagine a science, and quite another thing to attempt, 
 however imperfectly, to work it out. The " splendid ideal" 
 of the Phaedrus, like other intuitions of that dialogue, is an 
 anticipation rather than an embodiment of method : not neces- 
 sarily an early anticipation, for if wildness of imagination 
 marks a jugendschrift, what is to be said of the my thus in the 
 Statesman ? In the sixth book of the Republic there is ex- 
 pressed a more general conception of the ladder of hypotheses 
 by which science climbs to the ideal world, whence she de- 
 scends without the aid of the ladder by the chain of ideas. 
 But this notion, though implying a connexion of ideas, is still 
 vague, and gives less promise of the reality of science than the 
 method employed in the Politicus. 
 
 The Republic professes to be intelligible rather than exact, 
 and to proceed by popular methods. Even the order of the 
 sciences is not worked out as a dialectical problem, though the 
 seventh book contains passages of great subtilty and depth. 
 What is wanting in demonstration is " evened o'er'''' by the 
 abundance of imagination. But Socrates hints more than once 
 to Glaucon that there is a " longer way," which the dialectical 
 
xvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 .student must learn to tread. It is possible that we have a 
 sample of this in tin; present dialogue, which contains an ela- 
 borate defence of lengthened argument, and in which Young 
 Socrates is taken further afield than he had any thought of 
 going. 
 
 This struggle towards definitcness and reality is pro tanto an 
 approach on Plato's part to the later philosophy of Aristotle. 
 But there still remains between them an ineffaceable difference 
 of character. Plato when most concrete retains an undimin- 
 ished hold of the universal : ovpavu eorrjpiKro Kapi] kox It:\ 
 ydovl fiaLvet. The idealizing spirit may be exorcised, "tamen 
 usque recurrit." Gliscit intellectus altior. The true king, when 
 adapting himself to the particular circumstances of his state? 
 inflicting exile or death on some;- uniting others in marriage, 
 is still the perfectly wise philosopher with his eye fixed on the 
 pattern in the heavens. Contemplation and action are not 
 sundered : the knowledge of the universal truth is not sup- 
 posed to hinder the individual applications 
 
 II. Socratic and Pythagorean Elements. 
 
 a. Continuance of the Socratic Spirit. The question here 
 treated by the Stranger, after being proposed by Socrates, is 
 almost identical with some of those with which, according to 
 Xenophon, the real Socrates was most engaged : u 7roAts ; n 
 ttoXltikos ; ti apxv avQp&nutv ; tC apxt-«bs avOpunrcoi; ; And 
 though his method of search on these topics, as recorded in 
 the Memorabilia, is much simpler than that here used, it is 
 evident that Plato has in many instances only followed up the 
 hints given by his master. 
 
 There is, first, the postulate on which the whole dialogue 
 proceeds, that statesmanship is a science, that knowledge 
 ought to govern. You would not doubt, says Socrates, whe- 
 ther to place a skilful or unskilful pilot at the helm (I. i, 9) : 
 nor would you choose a pilot, or a carpenter, or a flute-player, 
 as you do your rulers, by casting lots (I. 2, 9). (Cf. Polit. 258 
 b, 290 e, 292 b, 298.) 
 
 e " And therefore the speculation that all things by a scale did ascend to 
 was excellent in Parmenides and Plato, Unity." — Bacon, 
 though in them only a speculation, 
 
TO THE STATESMAN. xvii 
 
 2. The imago of a herdsman, under which the king is at 
 first conceived, common enough certainly in poetry, was one 
 which Socrates delighted to use. "It is a bad herdsman 
 {fioG>v dye'A?;s j'o/xetk) who makes the number of the cattle less/' 
 was his well-known censure of the thirty tyrants (I. 2, 32). 
 The coincidence of language here is enough to justify the sup- 
 position that there is some connexion of thought : although 
 Plato evidently thinks that there arc cases where taking the 
 heads of citizens may be a purgation of the common weal. 
 (261 d alib., 293 d.) 
 
 3. The distinction of the king and tyrant in Mem. IV. 6, 
 I2 f , is nearly the same with that which Plato accepts pro- 
 visionally at one stage of the dialogue (277 d); and the same 
 passage of XenophonS expresses what Plato speaks of as the 
 commonly received mode of characterizing the several forms 
 of government (291 e). The thought however is here so ob- 
 vious that it would not be safe to lay much stress on this 
 coincidence, if taken alone. 
 
 4. The general and the judge (aTparrjyLKos, 8i/caoriKos) are 
 named by Socrates as next in dignity to the statesman (ttoXitl- 
 kos). Mem. II. 6, 38. Cf. Polit. 305. 
 
 But the chief traces of the historical Socrates in this dia- 
 logue, as in the Sophistes, are the method of definition by 
 exclusions, and the use of common examples to suggest hypo- 
 theses 11 : both much extended, and if not systematized, yet 
 made the objects of reflection and theory ; but in their en- 
 larged features bearing unmistakeably the marks of their first 
 origin. (See Sophist, sub. init., note on Sco/cpar?;?.) 
 
 Turning from the Socrates of Xenophon to the Platonic 
 Socrates, we find a passage of the Euthydemus, in which the 
 
 f Ba<ri\eiav Se Kal rvpavv'iSa apxai ivo/j.i£ei> elvaf otrov 5' e/c rifj.ijiJia.Toov, 
 
 fj.ev a.fx<poT(pas riyuTO etvai, Stacpepeiv ir\ovroKpariav ottov 5' e/c irdvTUV 87;- 
 
 Se pAAtjAcoj' iv6/xi£e. ttji/ fj.ei/ yap eic6w noKparlav. 
 
 tuv re twp avQpomuiv Kal Kara, vdfxovs *• Mem. I. 2, 37 : 'AAAa ra>vSe rot 
 
 twv iroKiwv apxh", fiaffi\et<w riyu-ro' ere a7re'x€<r0ai 3> Sco/cpares, SeTjtrei, T<2y 
 
 Ti]v 8e o.k6vto}v Kal /xt? koto v6fxovs, oTcuTeW Kal twv tzktSvoop Kal rtav 
 
 oAA' (jttws b iLpxw fiovXono, rvpav- x a ^ K€& " / ' Ka ^ T"P ol/j-at aiirovs ^8rj 
 
 yj'5 a# KaTaTZTp?(pdai Siadpv\Aovfj.4vovs virb 
 
 s Kal oirov fiev £k twv tos v6/j.ijj.a ctov Kal tuv (Sovk6\wv ye. Cf. 
 
 e-rriTeXovvTaiv at apxal KaOitrravrai, Gorg. 491 a, Sympos. 221 e. 
 
 TaVTf\V 
 
 r))v -KoAiTiiav api<TTOKpariav 
 
 *d 
 
xviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 question here solved by the Stranger is raised, but, Socratico 
 more, is left unanswered. Some of tlic elements of the inquiry 
 are, however, the same as here, and the passage has nearly 
 the same relation to this dialogue which the opening chapters 
 of the Protagoras have to the Sophist. (Euthyd. 289-291.) 
 
 " An art is required which can both make and enable us to 
 use rightly what is made. The art of speech-making is not 
 this, because the speech-maker is often different from the 
 speaker. Nor generalship, for that is a kind of hunting : and 
 the huntsman often docs not use what he catches, but delivers 
 them to others, and so the general yields up his prey to the 
 statesman. Let us try then the art of the statesman, or the 
 king. Here we fall into a labyrinth of inquiry (&ait€p eh 
 XajivpivOov epL-necrovres, olojxevoi ijbr] im Ttkei zlvai, TtepiKap.- 
 \}/avTes iraXiv Sa-rrep iv apxfl Trjs ^rj/o-eco? avzfyavryxzv Sines, ko.1 
 tov Xcrov beopitvoL, oaovnep ore to TtpGtTov io-KOTTovp,ev). For 
 when it is admitted that all the other arts yield over their 
 productions to the political or royal art (which are the same), 
 and that this art, by determining the use of everything, is the 
 pilot and saviour of the state, the question rises, what is her 
 peculiar work ? 
 
 "According to a previous agreement, this must be knowledge 
 of some kind, and this excludes wealth, freedom, peace, and 
 the like. Say, then, she makes the citizens wise. In what 
 knowledge does she make them wise, and what use will they 
 make of their wisdom ? Thus the original question returns 
 in a new form." 
 
 The thing sought for here is the same which the Politicus 
 professes to find, an absolute principle of life : a speculative 
 truth which is also the consummation of practical good : a 
 commanding theory. It was this which Socrates spent his 
 life in seeking : of which he confessed his ignorance, while he 
 declared life to be intolerable if it were not known. The 
 political problem is only a particular instance of the eternal 
 question, what is true and good ? 
 
 There is also considerable likeness in the manner of search. 
 And here it may be remarked that the specializing or indi- 
 vidualizing effort described in the previous section is a genuine 
 continuation of the work of Socrates, whose pertinacity in 
 sticking like a gad-fly to his respondent is most conspicuous, 
 
TO THE STATESMAN. xix 
 
 where he forces men by a fresh question from some generality 
 in which they would gladly rest (apyovoa — tL airepyaCtTai • 
 — rlva bij i7rt(TTriixi]v ; y ri x/^o'/xefla ;) 
 
 The chief difference is that the Elcatic Stranger works out 
 an answer to the question, which Socrates asked of Euthydc- 
 mus and his brother in vain : not however to the final question, 
 which Socrates, if true to his vocation, would have still pressed 
 upon the Stranger, though the problem in the present case 
 was more limited than in the former. But this difficulty, like 
 that about the nature of virtue, is evaded rather than solved 
 by the more complex notion of the state, whose members 
 have not all the same office. 
 
 As in the Republic there is found a place for a virtue in 
 harmony with reason although lower than reason, so here a 
 place is found for political happiness (k<x0' chtov tvhaijxovi 
 7T€(f)VK€ yiyvzvQai 7ro'Aet). All free citizens are to be trained 
 so as to think correctly of what is noble, just, and good, and 
 to give a reason of their opinion (/^era /3e/3aiwo-eoos). But with 
 the rulers or law-givers alone exists that perfect consciousness 
 which is the fountain of right action for the state, and whose 
 will determines in accordance with reason the use to be made 
 of all possessions (ocra t^rai Krija-ews). Other parallels might 
 be drawn (e.g. from Gorg. 517), shewing that the spirit of 
 Socrates is still working under the Eleatic mask : and if the 
 Socratic humour no longer makes perpetual skirmishes, it 
 lurks in ambush to take the reader by surprise, and is occa- 
 sionally transformed by the intensity of Plato's mood into an 
 almost savage irony. The writer knew well how laughable 
 was his picture of all things growing backwards in the golden 
 age ; nor could Swift have wished for more than to demonstrate 
 the close relationship between mankind and the pig. 
 
 There is the very genius of satire in the picture of the self- 
 exaltation of the crane, who looks on man as an inferior 
 animal ; and in the lofty scorn with which the philosopher 
 professes ignorance of the motley throng of satyrs and centaurs, 
 who are in fact no other than the princes and potentates of 
 this world. 
 
 Briefly, the object which Socrates set before himself and 
 others, Plato, when he wrote this dialogue, believed himself 
 partially to have attained — the science of truth and good : to 
 *d 2 
 
xx INTRODUCTION 
 
 Socrates an ideal only, dwarfing to nothing all actual know- 
 ledge ; to Plato an ideal ever in process of realization through 
 the activity of reason, when awakened by dialectic to perceive 
 the existence and follow the relations of ideas. 
 
 b. Pythagorean influence. Wherever Plato, especially in 
 his later dialogues, affirms anything respecting the order of 
 nature, the destiny of the soul, or the fabric of the state, 
 there is reason to suspect the influence, more or less controlled 
 by dialectic, of Pythagorean notions. To a great extent he 
 used these merely as forms of imagination through which he 
 could give more lively expression to his thoughts, but there 
 can be no doubt that this scientific mysticism had an increas- 
 ing charm for his mind, and had a still greater ascendancy 
 over his immediate followers. It is less generally admitted 
 that his dialectic also had a Pythagorean element, and yet it 
 seems far from improbable that, as he strengthened his belief 
 in the flux of phenomena by the study of Heraclitus and 
 Protagoras, and learnt from Parmenides to trust in the fixity 
 of ideas, so in the " struggle towards the concrete/ J of which 
 the argument of the Politicus is an important step, he may- 
 have been assisted by reading in Philolaus of the eternal 
 Harmony, whereby the Limit was impressed on the Unlimited, 
 to the production of a beautiful world. It was seen, in com- 
 menting on the Theaetetus (p. 201), that the philosophers who 
 said there was no knowledge of the Simple, but only of the 
 Complex, were probably Pythagorean. The word Koivcovta, 
 by which the correlation of ideas is expressed in the Sophist, 
 occurs in a place of the Gorgias where the Pythagorean 
 colouring is evident (Gorg. 507 e — 508 a). The ju,e0e£is of 
 the Parmenides is the jui'ju.acris of the Pythagoreans. And in 
 the Philebus the Koafxos rts ao-cojotaros (Trepas, aireipov, [alktov, 
 air [a, ixirpov), which forms the spring and framework of the 
 dialogue, is of a no less unmistakeable character. 
 
 In the present dialogue there occurs a direct criticism of 
 Pythagorean doctrine which affords a good illustration of 
 Plato's manner of dealing with the philosophies which most 
 influenced him. The Stranger is led incidentally to defend 
 the tediousness of the ' : longer way," whose object is not to 
 give pleasure, or to obtain a speedy result, but to enlighten 
 the reason. He does so by distinguishing that which is too 
 
TO THE STATESMAN. xxi 
 
 much from that which is more; a distinction which had 
 escaped even those philosophers who averred that the science 
 of measurement embraces all things. They led the way to 
 a great truth, which for want of dialectic they could not 
 work out. It is true that without measure all arts would ho 
 destroyed, but there arc two kinds of measure, one simply 
 relative, another, which is the secret of production, having 
 reference to the standard of what is meet. Here the Pytha- 
 gorean doctrine of numbers is brought into contact with the 
 Socratic ethical idea 1 . Aristotle would have said that certain 
 thinkers acknowledged the formal, but ignored the final cause. 
 In this passage, as perhaps in the Philebus, 44 c, the Pytha- 
 goreans are employed as " diviners" to point the way to the 
 spring which Plato himself must open. 
 
 We pass from this manifest allusion to some less certain 
 indications that Plato was at this time playing with the 
 weapons of this school. There need hardly be mentioned the 
 ludicrous mathematical definition of man as a biped ; or the 
 doctrine of metempsychosis, or the astronomy passing into 
 cosmology. We may confine our attention to points less 
 obvious than these. 
 
 The Pythagoreans were the only pre-Socratic school who 
 set themselves to raise human life towards an ideal standard k . 
 It can hardly be doubted that they had moral and political 
 doctrines in the fourth century B. C. But the few fragments 
 of Philolaus which remain are of a metaphysical and cosmical 
 turn. We know from Herodotus and Xenophanes that Pytha- 
 goras taught the immortality and transmigration of the soul ; 
 from Plato that his followers observed a certain rule of life ; 
 and the language of Philolaus, always full of religious fervour, 
 appears to recognize the Unity of the Supreme Being 1 . The 
 Pythagorean fragments even of the age immediately succeed- 
 ing Plato are of doubtful authority, and are so tinged with 
 Platonism, that, even if genuine, their value is diminished for 
 
 1 Compare a saying of Socrates him- two points, which both appear in this 
 
 self in the Memorabilia advising /xeTpt- dialogue — in the mode of teaching by 
 
 rfrrjs in the study of \oyi<T(J.oi, and cf. parable (5t' o/ioico/xa.Twi') and in religious 
 
 Legg. 4, 719 e, <ro\ 8' ovx ovros prjreov mysticism. 
 
 &>s VVV elires rb /xerpiou el-rran/. aAAa ti 1 ivr\ yap 6 ayefxevu Kal &pxoov awau- 
 
 rb /xerptov Kai oiroffov rjyreov. row debs els ael £d>v, jjlovijxos, aKivaros, 
 
 They coincided with Socrates in avrbs avrcu 6/j.o7os, cirepos tSiv &\\ 
 
 aw. 
 
xxii INTRODUCTION 
 
 our present purpose. But it seems probable on the whole 
 
 that the school at the earlier period of which wo speak 
 
 combined a ceremonial asceticism with a noble and elevating 
 
 morality. 
 
 We know that such was the ethical teaching of Empedocles, 
 
 who was a Pythagorean in this respect, and who at one time 
 
 cries, 
 
 Ou Tre'Aerat rots [xev Oe/xiTov Tobe, toIs 6° dOqurrrov 
 a\Xa to fxev ttolvtcov vop.i[xov bid t zvpvpAbovTOs 
 aWepos -qveKeuts rirarai, bid t' anXirov avytjs, 
 
 and presently, with still greater vehemence, 
 
 AeiAoi, TiavbeiXoC, Kvd\xa>v duo Yetpos €^ecr6i m ! 
 
 i. The idea of an infinite past, and of great cycles of time, 
 which took such hold of Plato's imagination, and which he 
 himself refers to an Egyptian source, was probably common 
 to him with the Pythagoreans, and if not derived from them, 
 must have been strengthened by their teaching. According 
 to Porphyry (V. Pyth. 19), "Pythagoras" taught that all 
 events took place in cycles and there was nothing new : on 
 Kara nepiobovs tlvcls to. yiyvo^vd ttotz irdXtv yiyverat, viov 8' 
 ovbev dirX&s ecrrt. The bearing of this on the " great mythe " 
 is sufficiently evident. 
 
 2. Plato also held in common with them, and may have 
 partly received from them, a strong sense of the inevitable 
 prevalence of evil in the world. It is not likely that he 
 derived this from Socrates, who complained not of evil but of 
 ignorance, and who refrained from cosmical speculation : and 
 this vein of reflection is deepest in his latest works. 
 
 Theophrastus (Met. 9. Ritter and Preller, no) speaks of 
 Plato and the Pythagoreans as being at one on this subject. 
 "The nature of the whole, they say, would be impossible 
 without the existence of an absolute formlessness and indefi- 
 niteness and disorder (cf. Polit. 273 d, ds top rrjs dvop,oioTr)Tos 
 airetpov ovra roirov bvrj), which they oppose to the combination 
 of the indefinite dyad and the One. This disorder has as it 
 
 m It is perhaps worth notice that iroiov/xevovs ineivov fiaOrjTas ehai fj.aX- 
 
 the ffiooirr) of the Pythagoreans was in Kov crfyuivTas Qavfjca^ovaiv ^ robs inl 
 
 some shape contemporary with Plato. to? \4yew /j.eylo-T7ju b~6£av exovras. 
 See Isocrates Busir. 29, tovs irpocr- 
 
TO THE STATESMAN. xxiii 
 
 were an equal share with the other nature, or even exceeds it. 
 Hence even God cannot be supposed able to bring all things to 
 perfection; but, if he be the cause of things, this is only bo far 
 as nature admits. And perhaps he would not choose to do 
 so, since there must follow an annihilation of Being, which is 
 composed of opposites." 
 
 This passage, although probably describing at second -hand 
 a theory not clearly understood, sufficiently proves that the 
 prevalence of imperfection was a difficulty much discussed, by 
 the semi-Pythagoreans of the Academy ; and it is this difficulty 
 which suggests to Plato's imagination the occasional dereliction 
 of the world by God. He modifies Pythagorean optimism, 
 by bringing into prominence another side of their theory. 
 The disorder out of which the whole was brought into the 
 present order, the breaking out again of this disorder so as 
 almost to bring Chaos back again, the fear that but for Divine 
 interposition the world might founder in the " infinite abyss 
 of dissimilitude," are touches vividly recalling this doctrine. 
 
 The Politicus contains another trace of this cuxop^os <pvais, 
 which it would appear trifling to notice, did not the dialogue 
 itself warn us that the commonest things may be examples of 
 great ideas. This is the mention of raw material amongst the 
 seven kinds of possessions (288, 9), with the remarkable 
 appellation to irpcaToyeves elbos : (compare the TrpaToyiveca of 
 the Orphic Hymns). This, and the well-known passage of the 
 Tinigeus, are the chief anticipations in Plato of the Aristotelian 
 material cause. 
 
 3. The doctrine of transmigration was naturally connected 
 Avith the prohibition of animal food and a higher than the 
 ordinary estimate of the relation of the lower animals to man. 
 In the passage of Porphyry already quoted, it is said that 
 " Pythagoras taught'''' that all animal life is kindred : oti 
 TiavTa ra yiyvop.zva tp.\\rvya 6p.oyevri Set vop.i(eiv. It is true 
 that every later testimony on this subject, when philosophy 
 had been leavened by the direct influence of Egypt and the 
 East, must be received with caution n ; but if this doctrine 
 
 n The often-quoted lines of Xeno- still nearer (364, 5) : evd" ^crav >ni\a 
 
 phanes, about Pythagoras and the dog, iravra kou at/dpcoTroicn irpoin]VTJ cprjpes 
 
 shew, however, something of a similar t' olccuoi re, <piAo<ppoavi>r] re SeS-qei. 
 tendency. And Empedocles comes 
 
xxiv INTRODUCTION 
 
 existed, Plato has used it ( i ) to point liis irony, by telling us 
 not hastily to distinguish man from the beasts, some of whom 
 perhaps regard him with the same contempt with which he 
 looks on them ; and (2) to adorn his talc by the circumstance 
 of man confabulating with the other creatures, when "there 
 was nothing wild." 
 
 That abstinence from the flesh of animals was not unknown 
 in Greece, at least in the way of tradition and theory, is cer- 
 tain from a remark of Plato's on the " Orphic" way of life 
 (Legg. 6, 782 c), and from the lines in which Empedocles vehe- 
 mently condemns the opposite practice, on the ground that so 
 men are devouring their own flesh and blood . (Compare 
 Aristoph. Ran. 1032 p .) And it is probable that Plato alludes 
 to this when he says that the creatures did not eat each other 
 in the golden age (ovk rjv ayptov ovh\v ovbe aWyjkcov e5w8at). 
 Another prohibition, having evidently the same origin, and 
 ascribed by Herodotus to the Pythagoreans in common Vith. 
 the Orphic mystics and the Egyptians, was that against bury- 
 ing in wool. 
 
 Closely allied to these Orphic notions is the idea of purifica- 
 tion (KaOapubs) , of which there are several applications in this 
 dialogue and in the Sophist. (Soph. 226 d ; Polit. 293 d, 303 
 d, 308 c, d. Compare the Phsedo.) Thus the idea of division 
 or separation as well as that of combination (StaKpto-ts as well 
 as avyKptais) had a root in the speculations of this school. 
 
 4. It remains to notice the most important, but unfortu- 
 nately the most doubtful, of the points at which this dialogue 
 touches on Pythagoreanism. The fancies hitherto mentioned 
 belong to morals and religion. Must not a school which 
 aimed at influencing states have had a political theory, how- 
 ever simple ? 
 
 ° Mop(p)]V 5' aWa^ayra naT-tjp <pi\ov vlhv aeipas 
 <rcpd(ei iwevx^fJ-evos, fteya v7]Trtos' bs 5e Tropevrai 
 Xiffao/J-evos Qvovt- 65' avrjKovffrriaiv 6fjioK\taiv 
 <r<pa£as 8' h> /jLeydpoicri /ca/c?V aKeyvvaro Scura. 
 uis 5' aureus Ttarep' vlbs lAaif ko.1 /J,rjrepa ircuSes, 
 dvfj.bv aTroppaiaavre, <p{\as Kara, adptcas iSovcriv 
 
 Ov navaeaOe <p6vov Suffix 6 ' 05 ; ovk iaopare 
 'AWfaovs Sd-rrovres a«:7j5ei7j(rt v6oio ; — Emp. Ka6apfj.o(. 
 P 'Op<pebs fiey yap tsAetcu 0" fj/juv KartSa^e (povoiv r ajre'xe<T0a(. 
 
TO THE STATESMAN. acx\ 
 
 Stobnous has preserved three fragments from a work of 
 Ecphantus of Syracuse on Royalty (7repi /3ao-iAei'as) containing 
 an ideal picture of the true king. Very similar fragments 
 are quoted by him from works on the same subject by Dioto- 
 gencs the Pythagorean and Sthcnklas the Locrian. These 
 are all later than Plato, and betray the influence of his teach- 
 ing; but they display with great consistency a phase of 
 Pythagorcanism which is at least interesting in connexion 
 with the present dialogue. The true king is pictured as a 
 kind of God on earth : having the same relation to his sub- 
 jects which the Supreme Being has to the Cosmos, surveying 
 them from above with an eye of wisdom (cf. Soph. 216 d), 
 having for them the same affection which a father has towards 
 his son, or a shepherd towards his flock, and being revered 
 by them as the law is revered by those who use it. The city 
 "imitates" the world and the king imitates the ruler of the 
 world. 
 
 "E^et oe ws 6ebs ttotI Koup-ov fiacriXzvs ttotI ttoKlp, Kal w? ttoXls 
 ttotl Koafxov fiacnXtvs ttotl deov. 'A p,ev yap ttoXls en ttoW&v koi 
 biafyepovTUiv avvapfMOcrOetcra Koap.co avvra^iv Kal app^oviav p.ep.i- 
 fxarai, 6 be (3aaL\evs apyav ey&v avvnevQvvov Kal avrbs aiy vop.os 
 eiiyj/vxps, 6ebs ev av6pa>iroi$ 7rapeo-x»?ju.au<7rai. — ©eopAp.6v evrL 
 irpayp-a ftaariXda. (Diotog. Tiepl /3ao-tAeia?. Mullach. Fragm. 
 PP- 534-5-) 
 
 Xprj top fiauiXia aocpbv i]p.ev ovtco yap eo-eirai avrtrip-os ko\ 
 (rjkdOTas r<3 Trpdrco 6eG>. Ovtos yap Ka\ <pwi evrl ko! Trpdros 
 fiacriXevs re koi bwdaras, 6 be yeveaL Kal p.Lp.daL, Kal 6 p,ev ev 
 r<5 Ttavri koi oAa), 6 be eirl yds, koX 6 p.ev del ra iravra biot- 
 kci re koI ((Lei avrbs ev aw<3 KeKTapevos rr\v aocpCav, 6 8' ev 
 Xpovoi eiii<TTdp.av q . (Sthenidas Locrus, 7repi fiacnkeCas. Ibid. 
 P-53 6 -) 
 
 'Ek tovt(x>v KOivbv dyadbv evappovTia tls koI tu>i> ttoWoJv 
 6p.o(p(t)Via p-erd ireiOovs avvaboLaas. 'O /car' dperdv e£dpxo>v /caAe- 
 erai re j3acrL\evs Kal evrt, ravrav eyav (ptKiav re nal Koivoaviav 
 ttotl rcos vtt' avravTov, dvitep 6 6eb$ ttotl re top Koap-ov Kal ra ev 
 avr<2. "OXav be rav evvoLav XPV 7rapaanevdCea6aL irpdrov p.ev 
 irapd tG> /3a<nAe'cos es ra>s f3a(n\evop.eva)S, bevrepov be irapd r&vbe 
 
 1 Compare with this the Oths Koyos of the Plnedo, 85 d : also the Parmenides, 
 134 c. 
 
xx vi INTRODUCTION 
 
 es tov ftacrtXea, buoia ytvvdropos ttoti vUa kcu ttoti TToip.vav 
 vo/xiws kcu v6\m ttotI xpw/aeWs- avrw. (Ecphantus, irepl fiaat- 
 Aeias. Ibid. p. 537-) 
 
 Xw fxev Oebs ovre ota/coVcos Zyj&v ovre vvapeTas ovt av Trpomd^i 
 Tivl XP ( ^/ jtei '°S ovbe (TT€(j)avS)u ?) avayopevoov ra>s TT€tOop.£vo&s r] 
 ariixafav rws aireiOeovTas — apyii — "^' ot/xai i;ap£yo>v d£io/Lu- 
 [xarov kuivrov (a\ov ZvTtOrjTi ttchtl r?/s glvtgj (fwmos. ... 06 
 cTrCyijos Trap" ap.lv /3arnAei)s tiQ>s ov\ opt-oCm avrapKris ; aneiKafav 
 re yap avTov, evl av aTreifcdtrae tu Kpartcrrw, /cat Ttd^res eauraK 
 ireLpcop-evoi tovtm 6p.oiovv fiacnXtKol tcrovTai' ra 5' ocra /3ias ical 
 av&yKas ivrl twv vitoTiTayfiivbiV, £viot<- e/<daT(j> rav irepl rav 
 p.ip,acnv irpoQvp.iav dcpaipeerar x^P's tvvoias yap dp.d)^avov e£o- 
 [xoicadrjvai, a /xdAiara iravrav acpavi^t to (poftepov. I2s tide r\v 
 ras avdptoiTLvas cpwio? bvvarbv acpekev rb Kal neiOovs rivas 
 
 biecrOaL en^Lb-qnep TreiOii) epyov rl kvri irapoLKtov dvdyKa,' 
 
 Ttpaxa yap a<f) aura? avra. Karepyd^erai Ta-rrep tKtCvav bU<pvyav. 
 "Ocra §' avToipva>$ ra> KaA<2 xp?jrai, tovtols ovbep.(a ttzlOovs albcas' 
 e7reiS?/7rep ovbe cpd/3o? avdyKas. 'KvepydaatTo 5' av p.6vos 6 
 /3ao-iAei>? av0puma> cpwei Kal robe to dyaOov, ws bta p.ip.acnv 
 avTui tS> Kpicrcrovos ttotI to biov eirecrtfai. (Ibid. p. 53$ ■) There 
 is much more to the same purport. 
 
 Now are we to suppose that this somewhat crude represen- 
 tation of what ought to be (resembling perhaps suspiciously 
 in some features the Stoical wise man) is merely a caricature 
 of Plato's philosopher-king, or had both pictures an ante- 
 cedent in Pythagorean teaching ? However this may be, there 
 is no mistaking the strong likeness between the ideal herein 
 absolutely set forth, and that which Plato in the Politicus, 
 according to his manner of treating contemporary views, first 
 states, then gently sets aside, and in the sequel utilizes in a 
 modified form. " In speaking of the king as the shepherd of 
 his people, we borrowed the image of majesty from a theo- 
 cratic time. Yet the true statesman is he who rules with 
 knowledge, and harmonizes the state, bringing together 
 the diverse elements of good, and rejecting the bad. He 
 who does this not merely imitates but reproduces the divine 
 image." 
 
 On the above data, imperfect as they are, I hazard the 
 following conjecture : That the idea of the rightful sovereignty 
 
TO THE STATESMAN. xxvii 
 
 of wisdom existed in the Pythagorean school before Plato. 
 That Plato's Republic, partly inspired by this, had given a 
 fresh impulse to the same line of thought amongst the Pytha- 
 gorizing students of the Academy ; and that Plato, having 
 in the Sophistcs criticized the speculative idealism of these 
 friends of his, being himself perhaps somewhat iVcsilhixiunnr, 
 proceeds to call in question their equally premature idealism 
 in politics : shewing, first, that a " paternal government " 
 does not secure happiness unless it rouse intelligence ; and, 
 secondly, that you must "first catch" your ideal king before 
 you can apply your theory to practice. 
 
 Even if this conjecture should prove baseless, it will hardly 
 be questioned that the analogy which is more than hinted 
 between the Cosmos and the State (w ^v\j.jxiixovixevoi koX avve- 
 TToixevot k.t.K. — 274 d), the " purification" of the body politic, 
 and the harmony of divers elements in the web of social life, 
 are notions having a near affinity to Pythagorean teaching. 
 Nor would it be rash to affirm the same of the theory of 
 opposite virtues, which is certainly not Socratie, and is in- 
 troduced as an unusual saying (ovk dwOora koyov ovhajx&s — 
 306 b). 
 
 Speaking generally, the most obvious affinities to Pytha- 
 goreanism in Plato's later writings are, 1. An inci'easingly 
 religious spirit. 2. Intense interest in all scientific inquiries, 
 to which the name $iko<TO(pla x is now applied. 3. The treat- 
 ment of ethical questions (as in the Philebus) from a cosmical 
 point of view. 4. The prevalence of the ideas of harmony, 
 rhythm, and the like, especially in their application to morals 
 and politics. 
 
 But the Socratie spirit, or rather the mind of Plato 
 awakened long since by Socrates, shines through the cloud 
 of Pythagorean fancies (not that these were without intelli- 
 gence), and reduces them to just proportions by the dry light 
 of reason, while his imagination turns all that it touches into 
 gold. If we could compare the Politicus with an entire 
 writing of Philolaus, Eudoxus, or Speusippus, the probability 
 is that we should find the difference immense : vovv €x. 0VTas 
 
 i-vh0V TOVTOVS jJLOl'OVS €Vpij(T€LS T&V \6yWV. 
 
 T Tim. 88 c : novtriicrj nal -naar) (piAotrotpla. Th:a?t.i43 d : yev/uiTpiKyiv ij two 
 ^AXTjf <pi\o<TO(pia.y. 
 
 *e 2 
 
xxviii lNTl!()!>r(TIO\ 
 
 We now turn from these preliminaries to examine Plato's 
 thoughts as they arc presented to us in this dialogue. And 
 here there are three topics which chiefly call for remark : the 
 fable of Cronos ; the description of existing constitutions, and, 
 in connexion with this, the theory of legislation. 
 
 III. The Myth. 
 
 This is not the place for discussing, except incidentally, the 
 nature of Plato's myths as a general feature of his writings. 
 But the solution of several questions which are suggested by 
 this particular talc may perhaps throw some light on the wider 
 problem. 
 
 (i) What is the motive for interrupting the argument with 
 this narrative '( (2) In how far, or in what sense, does Plato 
 believe in the truth of his own story ? (3) Is there any humour 
 mingled with the apparent solemnity of tone ? (4) What are 
 the precise ideas to whose working this imaginative creation 
 is due? (5) Can these ideas be reconciled with those which 
 Plato has elsewhere expressed ? (6) What eifect has the 
 narration in determining the course of argument which is 
 pursued in the remainder of the dialogue ? 
 
 (1.) The chief motive of the fable is to recal the mind from 
 resting in a merely abstract ideal. " We are not living in the 
 golden age :" that is, in forming our conception of true states- 
 manship we must take account of the imperfect conditions of 
 the actual world. In order to impress this lesson, the simple 
 notion of one who should feed his flock like a shepherd is 
 drawn out at length, embodied in a tale, and associated with 
 a state of innocence and ease, before man eat bread by the 
 sweat of his brow, when all creatures lived in harmony. And 
 still further to point the contrast between the ideal and actual, 
 the gates of this Eden are closed by the story of a change or 
 fall, not caused by any antecedent sin or curse, but by the 
 necessity inherent in created things. An air of probability 
 and even of historic truth is given to this strange fiction, by 
 finding in it an explanation of several fragments of early 
 mythological tradition. 
 
 The Stranger admits that he has allowed himself to ex- 
 tend his fable beyond what was necessary for the argu- 
 
TO THE STATESMAN. xxix 
 
 mcnt. Hence there is no reason why every detail .sliouM be 
 made to square with the main design. Plato, as is his wont, 
 passes at once from the immediate question to the more 
 general one, of which it is a part ; from the imperfect con- 
 ditions of human government to the origin ami necessity of 
 evil; so that the cosmical features of the myth grow out of 
 proportion to the political. But the language with which 
 the myth is introduced and the after-comment leave no doubt 
 as to the purpose for which it is inserted. " The king, unlike 
 other herdsmen, has many rivals, who likewise feed the flock." 
 " The reason of this difficulty is that our definition confounds 
 the king with the Divine shepherd, whereas the statesman of 
 our age cannot in any sense be a nourisher of his people." 
 
 As the tale proceeds, there is developed a further lesson : 
 namely, that the simple ideal of a state of innocence is not 
 only impracticable but incomplete ; that a ft Cos reAeio?, a life 
 under perfect conditions, is not necessarily the happiest life. 
 The question is how the life is used: the philosophic spirit 
 is the one essential of true happiness : even one whose choice 
 of a life has been restricted, may, if he use opportunity with 
 all his might, have a tolerable existence (nal reAevrcua> Itiiovti, 
 £vv I'w khop.£vu>, avvTovcos (5>vtl Ktirai filos ayairriros, ov kclkos — 
 Rep. 10, 619 b) ; though if the children of Cronos used their 
 golden time rightly, no doubt they were far happier than we 
 can be. (Cf. Rep. 6, 497 a : 'AAAd roi, r\ 8' 6s, ov ra lAd^cra 
 av hia-npa^aixzvos airaWaTTOLTo. Oiibe ye, elirov, tcl p\iyiara^ p.r\ 
 Tvyuv TtoXireias irpoariKovaj-js' kv yap rrj vpoo-rjKovar] avTos re 
 fxaWov av£r}(T€Tai nal juera ray t8iW ra koivol acacrei.) 
 
 Plato has shewn in two other passages that au ideal formed 
 by abstracting from existing evils is no sufficient help towards 
 the conception of political or moral excellence ; that virtue is 
 not to be sought in the unconscious innocence of childhood ; — 
 once in describing the simple or primitive state in the Republic, 
 Glaucon's " city of pigs," where " man's life is cheap as 
 beast's," and again in the endeavour to conceive the origin of 
 society at the opening of the third book of the Laws. But 
 in the former description man needs defence against the in- 
 clemency of winter, is not exempt from work, and answers to 
 the definition of a cooking animal, though his cooking is of the 
 simplest. In the latter the mountain shepherds whom the 
 
xxx INTRODUCTION 
 
 flood of Deucalion spared to be a sort of germ of future 
 humanity, living peacefully together because they bad few 
 companions and there was enough for all, when there were 
 neither poor nor rich, nor insolence, nor injustice, nor envy, 
 but simplicity and good faith, are not set forth as an ideal, 
 though they arc said to be better than men after them, but 
 are pictured in order to assist the conception of the origin of 
 law, by imagining a previous state of " patriarchal" govern- 
 ment in which the habits and traditions of each family were 
 supreme. Legislation became necessary when these clashed 
 in the early life of cities 8 . 
 
 Here, on the other hand, Plato has given his fancy free scope 
 to revel in the details of a spontaneous universal life : where 
 there is no unsatisfied longing, no effort, no pangs of birth, 
 no crying of the infant " that he is come to this great stage 
 of fools*," no old age, no flesh that sees corruption : the more 
 unlike his picture is to present realities, the better he attains 
 his end, by enforcing the necessity (however unwelcome, Legg. 
 803 b, eon hi] Toivvv ra tu>v avOpuiroov Ttpay^aia }xzy6.\.r]s [xev 
 <Tirovbf]s ovk a^ia, avajKaiov ye [j.7]v cniovhaCtiv, tovto 8e ovk 
 evTvxts) of adapting inquiry as well as practical effort to the 
 actual lot of man. And by adding a few extravagant or even 
 grotesque touches, he gives play to his humour, and gently 
 ridicules those who were content to rest in the simple unap- 
 plied conception of a paternal king. 
 
 The substance of the myth is therefore very similar to the 
 remark in the Lysis : " Supposing evil to be done away, 
 would there be no more hunger or thirst or anything of the 
 kind ; or would there be hunger, as inseparable from animal 
 life, but no longer hurtful ; and thirst and other desires, but 
 without bringing harm ; or is it absurd to ask what would 
 happen or not happen then, for who can tell ? But one thing 
 we know, that, in our present state, hunger and other desires 
 are sometimes productive of evil, but may sometimes be a 
 means of good." 
 
 (2.) A recent writer on the Myths of Plato u says not only 
 
 6 A nearer parallel from the Laws KAadcd re not KwKvtra, Id&v aavvrj- 
 
 will be quoted presently. Oia x&P 0V - 
 
 * Compare with this of Shakspeare u Mr. Westcott in the Contemporary 
 
 the fragment of Empedocles, 1. 13, Review for June, 1866. 
 
TO THE STATESMAN. xxxi 
 
 that "Plato claims that his myths arc above all true in 
 spirit;" and that "the central idea of the myth is affirmed 
 absolutely;" but also that "in some cases the whole story is 
 distinctly asserted to be historical 7 ." "He" (Plato) "dis- 
 claims in fact the title Myth in a disparaging sense for the 
 stories to which we now apply it. They are," he says, " real 
 narratives (\6yoi) and not myths x , and where ho docs use the 
 word, he still maintains the existence of a substantial basis of 
 fact for such myths as admit of an historical tcst y ." The 
 same writer adduces in proof of this the care with which 
 Plato in the Republic apologizes for his " Phoenician lie." Mr. 
 Grote in a somewhat different tone, but to the same effect, 
 says of the Critias, " Plato wishes us to believe that the trans- 
 action is historical. As to particular narratives the line 
 between truth and fiction was obscurely drawn in his mind." 
 These remarks are quoted merely to shew that it is not an 
 idle question to ask, How far did Plato believe in the literal 
 truth of the present narration ? 
 
 The answer may partly be deduced from two places of the 
 Republic in which Plato's own conception of the nature of a 
 myth is expressed. 
 
 a. " There are two kinds of oral instruction, one false, one 
 true ; and the false must precede the true. For a fable is a 
 falsehood containing truths." He then lays down the rule 
 for instructive fictions, that they must convey true and just 
 notions about Divine things and about human life. (Rep. 2, 
 
 377-) 
 
 6. And one of these true notions about Divine things is, 
 that God cannot lie : amongst other reasons, because he has 
 perfect knowledge, and need not have recourse to fables which 
 he knows to be false, in order to gain an approximate concep- 
 tion of antiquity, as men are compelled to do (ev rats \xv6o\oyiais 
 hia to \xi] dhivai 07577 raA?i0e? e'xet irepl iS>v na\aiG>v a^o/xotoCiTes 
 raj aA?/#ei to \j/evbos otl ixakiara, ovtco XPV (Ti l J - 0V TiOLovfxsv. Rep. 
 2, 382 d). 
 
 A myth therefore, in the Platonic sense, is a fictitious narra- 
 tive, (a) conveying true ideas, and (6) in reference to occurrences 
 
 v "See Timeeus, 20 d, 21 a,d, 26 c. * " Gorgias, 523 a. Compare pp. 
 
 And so Critias invokes Memory to help 526 d, 527 a ; Meno, Si d, e." 
 him in relating the whole story." y " Politicus, 26S e, 269 a, b." 
 
xx.xii INTRODUCTION 
 
 beyond the range of actual knowledge, supplying imagined 
 probabilites for ascertained facts. The latter is Plato's version 
 of the ordinary function of mythology (Critias, p. no a, ixvQo- 
 \oyta yap aya{iJTr)arL$ re tu>v irakaiGiv //era crxoA//? afx ZttI ras 
 7ro'A.eis tpxcvdov) ; the former is the special condition or limit 
 which he imposes on its nse. 
 
 In practice this conception of the myth is further modified, 
 by the dramatic and poetic form in which Plato's philosophy 
 is cast. The myth in the Protagoras, for example, though 
 closely parallel in some of the details to that in the Politicus, 
 is meant to convey an idea which Socrates combats and which 
 Plato evidently does not fully accept. So also the elaborate 
 myth of Aristophanes in the Symposium contains a phase of 
 thought about the origin of Love, which is afterwards glanced 
 at as an hypothesis of little value (Symp. 205 e). And as the 
 myth is coloured to suit the particular speaker, so it partakes 
 of the peculiar spirit of the particular dialogue. We hear 
 nothing in the Phaedrus about the judgment of the dead, nor 
 in the Republic about the wings of the soul, nor in the Sym- 
 posium about her previous existence and future life ; nor in 
 the Gorgias about the edict of Lachesis. And if there is not 
 perfect consistency in these greater matters, there is of course 
 still more variety in the minor incidents with which Plato's 
 fertile imagination when once set to work gives all the distinct- 
 ness of reality (evdpyeiav) to each separate picture. The 
 harmonist of Plato's myths would have a task only less 
 difficult than the rationalist of the old mythology (are aypoiK<a 
 Tivt crocpiq \pa>p.€vos, TroXXrjs avr<2 cr)(oXri$ Se^oret). 
 
 But Plato, like every poet, delights in making his fiction 
 as like life as possible, and amongst other artifices is the 
 asseveration of the truth of what is said. When Critias calls 
 Mnemosyne to his aid, or when Socrates in the boldest part 
 of the Phaedrus says, " We must speak the truth, especially 
 since truth is our theme 2 ," is it possible not to detect a covert 
 smile? And when the speaker in the Timaeus so carefully 
 traces every link in the chain of tradition by which the tale 
 of Atlantis had come through Egypt to Solon, and from Solon 
 to the aged Critias, are we not at once reminded of the words 
 
 * It is of this part that Socrates is somewhat abated, eoi/ce . . . tk \x\v 
 says afterwards, when his fine frenzy &AAa 7rca5iS TrrnauffQai. 
 
TO THE STATESMAN. xxxiii 
 
 of Pluedrus (which by the way have reference to an equally 
 circumstantial tale), "0 Socrates, you can make Egyptian 
 
 stories or any others with equal case" ? The words of Socrates 
 to Calliclcs, " You will call this a story, but I call it a true 
 account," must be interpreted by the remark which follows : 
 "You will despise this as an old wives' fable, and indeed it 
 would be natural to despise my words, if we could find any- 
 thing better or truer, but in all our inquiries this one principle 
 remains firm, that Ave must fly from doing more than from 
 suffering wrong •" where Socrates insists on the truth, not of 
 the myth itself, but of the lesson which the myth conveys. 
 
 It is probably from the same artistic instinct and with the 
 same purpose of giving an air of probability to his inventions, 
 that he founds them, as it is indeed natural he should do, 
 upon the traditions already familiar to his countrymen. These 
 formed the common medium through which he could communi- 
 cate his ideas. He moulds them, indeed, with great ingenuity 
 to his purposes. Poets had always dealt freely with mythology. 
 But by appealing to the story of Atreus, or Deucalion, or 
 Prometheus, for confirmation of some part of his recital, he 
 seemed to bridge the gulf between the known and unknown. 
 
 This practice, as well as the groundwork of Pythagorean 
 beliefs, with which Plato had, no doubt, strong personal sym- 
 pathy, gives a degree of consistency to the body of the Platonic 
 myths which they would not have otherwise. And he assumes 
 Such an air of simple truthfulness in telling his story, that by this 
 art concealing art, a certain probability is given to the wildest 
 imaginations. " Uncertainties now crown themselves assured." 
 
 It is chiefly in the latest dialogues that the myth is seriously 
 applied by Plato to the second of the two purposes which he 
 acknowledges in the Republic, the reproduction of prehistoric 
 events. There seems to be a transition, or growth, on the 
 imaginative side of his philosophy corresponding to that 
 already noticed on the dialectical side : from the abstract to 
 the concrete, from vague fancies instinct with speculative ideas, 
 like the procession in the Phsedrus, to supposed facts, like the 
 war of Athens with Atlantis. He seeks to apply his meta- 
 physical philosophy, which by this time acknowledged a prin- 
 ciple of change and production, to the interpretation of the 
 actual world, and he supplies the defects of experience and 
 *f 
 
xx\.\ 1\TI!0!)!(TION 
 
 observation by the help of imagination. Ami he claims for 
 his (ales the same degree of truth which he assigns to poetry 
 
 (Legg. 3, 682 a): Qdlov yap ovv hi) Kal to ttoltitlkw evOearrriKov 
 ov yeVos virviohovv irokkow tow kcit' aXi'jOeiav yiyvo\iivi>w £vv Tim 
 Xdpim Kal Moixrais er/>a7rrerai kudo-Tore. This tendency may 
 be illustrated by comparing the Republic, TimsBUS, and Laws, 
 of which the order of sequence is undoubted. The city 
 founded in the Republic has no local habitation on earth, 
 unless in some unknown and distant land, " far enough out of 
 our ken/' though perhaps such a state may have existed at 
 some period in the infinite succession of past time. In the 
 Tima3iis and Critias this state is discovered, not far away 
 in place, but remote in time, the Athens of a forgotten age 
 contending successfully against a nation who were all that 
 historical Athens desired to be. The state for which the 
 Athenian Stranger legislates in the Laws, is a new Cretan 
 settlement, imaginary of course, but imagined under the 
 conditions of Plato's own time. 
 
 To return now to the Statesman and to apply some of the 
 preceding remarks to the myth before us. The main incident, 
 the change on which all other change depends, is mentioned 
 nowhere else by Plato. The artistic completeness and unity 
 of the Great Myth is very striking. Though it differs from 
 other Platonic myths, it may be said to comprehend them 
 from a greater imaginative height. He speaks in the Timaeus 
 of periodic destructions of life upon the earth by earthquake, 
 fire or flood, and in the Laws the same thing is assumed. But 
 the reverse movement of the whole universe, the relinquish- 
 ment of the helm of the great vessel, and the consequent 
 gradual deterioration of all things, is a conception occurring 
 nowhere else. It is adopted for the occasion, for the enforce- 
 ment of a particular lesson. The old fable of the autochthones 
 is one which Plato delights in using. It appears in the Prota- 
 goras, Symposium, Republic, Sophist, Tima3us, Critias, and 
 elsewhere. But it is nowhere else imagined that men coming 
 fullgrown from the earth, go backwards through the stages 
 of manhood, boyhood, infancy, and so pass away. There is 
 a picture of a theocracy, founded on the reign of Cronos, in 
 the Critias and Laws as well as here. But here only the 
 other animals are placed under Divine superintendence as well 
 
TO THE STATESMAN. 
 
 as man, and a reason is given for the cessation of this form 
 of government. Again, while here and in the Laws the 
 Divine guidance is immediate, in the Critias, Eephaestus and 
 Athena act by creating good men as legislators. These dis- 
 crepancies are not greater than those previously mentioned, 
 and therefore cause no suspicion of spuriousness, but they 
 suffice to shew how little wisdom there would be in taking 
 Plato's meaning literally; or in attributing the care which is 
 taken to provide a channel through which the tradition may 
 have been preserved, or the solemn air with which disbelief 
 is deprecated, to anything but the anxiety of a Defoe or 
 Swift to make the illusion as complete as possible. 
 
 (3.) This leads us to the third question proposed above — Is 
 there an element of humour in the fable or in the manner of 
 telling it? If on other grounds we believe Plato to be the 
 author of the Politicus, we can hardly doubt that there is. 
 He must have felt the humorousness of making the respondent 
 answer so promptly to the first statement of the astounding 
 fact, " All that you say seems extremely probable ;" and he 
 must have shared the amusement of his reader in contem- 
 plating the dwindling forms of the earth-born race: just as 
 Empedocles (however firmly he believed it) must have smiled, 
 if he had any humour, at his own invention of the Kopacu 
 avav)(€ves, the /3pa)^[oves evvLbes wphyv, the fiovyevr) avbpo- 
 Trpoopa, and avbpocpvrj fiovKpava. Having again alluded to this 
 singular passage (Polit. 270 d, e). it may be well to take the 
 opportunity of explaining the motives which seem to have 
 suggested the addition of this peculiar feature. It has the 
 twofold effect of giving greater consistency and completeness 
 to the story, and of pointing the contrast between the two 
 alternate cycles. A link was needed to combine the change 
 in the heavenly motion with the production of mankind from 
 earth, which Plato chose, for a purpose of his own, to associate 
 with the spontaneous generation of all things in the reign of 
 Saturn. A hint for this appeared in the description of 
 Hesiod : " They had no old age : their death was like a 
 sleep/'' Now if, like the heroes of Cadmus, they rose full- 
 grown from the ground, and saw not grey hairs, since their age 
 could not stand still, it must go backwards. And this would 
 be only in accordance with the change in the universal motion, 
 *f % 
 
txxvi [XTHOnrCTION 
 
 a change of ku^o-is followed by a change of yeVeo-ts. But the 
 more naturally the result follows from the premises, the more 
 effectively it strikes the imagination with the greatness of the 
 supposed revolution. Hence it is put in the foreground of 
 the picture, p-eyuarov h\ -nobe k. t. A. And here there peeps out 
 a deeper vein of ironical humour from beneath the matter-of- 
 course gravity of the narration. " If ever there is a beneficent 
 paternal government on earth/' Plato seems to say, " it will 
 be when iron swims and rivers run back to their fountains*." 
 But it need not be assumed that he has no sympathy with the 
 ideal at which he smiles, as being ev^decrrepov tov biovros- 
 Compare Theaet. 200 b, yeWois nepio-TtpeGxnv, Rep. 7, 536 b, 
 yeko'iov 5' eyvyt koi kv rw Trapovn eoi/ca imdeZv, where Plato 
 openly laughs at his own enthusiasm. 
 
 (4.) But if the myth is poetry and not history, and is even 
 tinged with humour, what are the serious thoughts which this 
 strange medium is chosen to convey ? There is, first, the main 
 purpose which has been already described, to lift the imagi- 
 nation to the conception of a theocracy, and so to remove by 
 a sort of "homoeopathic" remedy the crudities of a shallow 
 optimism. Very similar means are used in the Laws to shew 
 that unlimited monarchy is unsuitable for the present state of 
 man. But when this principal thought is once admitted, other 
 reflections crowd in. They are such as the following. 
 
 In our present state, evil is inextricably mixed with good : 
 and is indeed so predominant, that God would seem to have 
 left the world to itself. For in all that is created, evil is the 
 necessary consequence of freedom. The practical lesson for 
 man is that he too is made the guardian of his own life, and 
 in conjunction with necessity, the builder of his own destiny. 
 And as the universe and the animal kingdom follow, so far as 
 they can recall it, the pattern of the Divine cycle, so man 
 should track out everywhere the vestiges of the Divine wisdom 
 which still remain b : believing, that although the Creator has 
 
 a The notion of " a life which is a rrw/xa acpo/j-oiov/xeva. " For the child is 
 
 gradual disrobing of the spirit from its not Plato's type of the unclouded 
 
 earthly dress," which one interpreter reason, the " best philosopher, seer 
 
 finds here, is well imagined, but is blest" of Wordsworth, 
 surely inconsistent with the words, b '6<rov iv r]fj.?v adavacrlas evetrrt, 
 
 " els tt)v tov veoyevovs iratSbs tyvaiv rovrq TretOofievovs. Legg. 4, 713 e. 
 airtfei, Kard re ttjv ^\iv\r\v nal Kara, to 
 
TO THIS STATESMAN. xxxvii 
 
 entered od His Sabbath of contemplation 1 -', His eye is still upon 
 the world and all things in it, and that, being good, Ho will 
 not forsake the work of His hands, but will restore His creature 
 
 to the fulness of life and immortality in due time. 
 
 Meanwhile we may be consoled by the reflection, that a life 
 under perfect conditions is not a happy life, unless it is spent 
 in philosophy, and that the philosophic spirit in whatever con- 
 ditions is the earnest of happiness here and hereafter. 
 
 Subordinate to this main argument are several incidental 
 thoughts : — i. God is not the author of evil. He cannot con- 
 tradict His own nature. 2. By parity of reasoning, there 
 cannot be opposite Divine Powers of evil and good. (Is there 
 here an allusion to Zoroastrianism ?) 3. God permits evil, as 
 the inevitable concomitant of a bodily nature. 4. God is the 
 only source of life and immortality. 5. In a theocracy there 
 would be no laws but the Divine Will, no marrying or giving 
 in marriage, for each new being would be the immediate work 
 of the Divine Hand. 6. Philosophy is the interrogation of 
 all natures. 7. Man in his primitive state is weak and de- 
 fenceless : he receives from Heaven only such gifts and such 
 instruction as are- indispensable in order that he may improve 
 these by the exercise of his own invention under the stimulus 
 of necessity. 8. The idea of transmigration and of the soul 
 forgetting every thing at birth is assumed as a matter of 
 course. It need hardly be said that all these thoughts are 
 "plastic" here; i.e. they are not first thought out and then 
 figuratively expressed, but emerge together with their symbols 
 in the united play of reason and imagination. 
 
 (5.) Several difficulties occur, even on the above shewing, in 
 comparing the myth with other utterances of Plato, (a) Can 
 this picture of the permission of evil be reconciled with the 
 goodness of the Creator as represented in the Timseus ? (6) Is 
 the relegation of the principle of communism to the golden 
 age consistent with the fifth book of the Republic, or the dis- 
 paragement of the education of perfect circumstances with the 
 ideal of juowik?) in the second book 1 The answer must be that 
 these views are not perfectly consistent, but that a probable 
 reason can be given for each discrepancy. 
 
 c els ttjv avrov Trepiwiryv cure'em;. 
 
sxxviii [NTR0DUCTI01S 
 
 a. The Deity of the Timseus effects all without moving from 
 his place, and when his commands are given "continues in the 
 same stay 4 ." The Deity of the Politicus is said in ;i Rgure 
 to leave the helm of the universe and retire to his speculative 
 height. The Deity of the Timaeus confers an absolute immor- 
 tality on the stars ; the Deity of the Politicus suffers the 
 whole visible universe to totter on the verge of dissolution. 
 The universe in the Timaeus, though not exempt from evils, 
 as a whole is " very good/'' The universe in the Politicus 
 copies the pattern of the Divine movement so clumsily that at 
 length the good is almost overwhelmed by the evil. That the 
 same writer could be possessed at different times with views 
 so divergent, is a fact which may be classed with other " con- 
 trasts of prophecy." It may be partly explained by the pecu- 
 liar bitterness with which the author, at the time of writing 
 this dialogue, seems to have looked upon the world. But 
 there are other reasons. The motive of the piece is in the 
 one case cosmological, in the other ethical : that is, the Uni- 
 verse is held up as a mirror to exhibit on a large scale the 
 condition of man. In the TiinaBiis therefore the ills which 
 flesh is heir to have a subordinate place, in the Politicus they 
 are seen in the greatest prominence ; and while in the one 
 account human action is determined by physical constitution 6 , 
 in the other, man, with the Universe, is left to the guidance 
 of his own will. Further, the direct object of this fable is to 
 contrast the actual with the ideal, whereas the purpose of the 
 Timseus is to exhibit the production of the Cosmos in accord- 
 ance with the idea of good. 
 
 The music of the Tirnseus is more highly strung f , for there 
 the movements of the Same and Other are combined in the 
 formation of the mundane soul, whereas here the opposite 
 movements take place alternately. This difference is like that 
 which Plato notices between Heraclitus and Empedocles ; of 
 whom the latter resolved the movements which the former 
 united. (Symp. 187 a, Soph. 242 e.) At least equally discordant 
 with the Timseus is the assumption in the Laws that there are 
 two kinds of soul, one essentially evil, the other good : and 
 
 d Tim. 42 c Compare the fine saying c Tim. 87 sqq. 
 
 of Xenophanes, aAA.' enrdvevde irSvoio f crvvrovwripa. 
 
 voov (ppevl wdvra KpaSatvet. 
 
TO THE STATESMAN. xxxis 
 
 the distance between man and God is even more emphatically 
 stated in many passages of this, Plato's latest writing. 
 
 Having noticed the difference, it is right to point out the 
 resemblance between the two myths. In both, God brings 
 the Universe in the beginning ont of disorder into order, so far 
 as this is possible for a being which has a bodily frame, though 
 animated by a soul, both in the form of reason and desire. 
 lie is the father, the composer, the artificer, the source of 
 immortality, the author of all excellence and beauty in His 
 creature. And because He is good, He will not see the disso- 
 lution of that which He has made. Yet constrained by neces- 
 sity, he permits periodical destructions of living creatures from 
 the face of the world. 
 
 b. The children of Cronos, like the guardians in the Republic, 
 have no possession of wives and children. Here is a point of 
 coincidence, and yet of discrepancy : for that which in the 
 Republic is planned as a scheme possible though difficult, is 
 here removed into cloud-land. In the Laws also it is reiterated 
 that the community of wives and children is the condition of 
 the perfect state ; but in that dialogue the laws of marriage 
 are similar to those sketched out at the conclusion of this, 
 providing for the intermixture as far as possible of courageous 
 and gentle breeds. On this point I can only suggest a con- 
 jecture. Is it possible that Plato had once hoped to see 
 something like his ideal polity realized, and that his hopes 
 (by the fall of Dion or otherwise) had been frustrated ? This 
 would account not only for the difference in this particular, 
 but also for the contrast between the hopefulness of the 
 Republic and the almost despair of human nature visible in 
 the Statesman. But this is a speculation to which we shall 
 have occasion to return. A reason which may be assigned 
 with greater safety (while not inconsistent with the foregoing) 
 is the more vivid realization in this dialogue of the actual con- 
 ditions of human things : and this will also account for the 
 remaining discrepancy, viz. that while in the Republic great 
 virtue is assigned to the "surroundings" of childhood and 
 youth as a means of education, it is left doubtful here whether 
 the children of the golden age profited by their opportunities 
 or not. It is true that the two passages do not directly con- 
 flict with each other, but the one shews a higher estimate of 
 
xl INTRODUCTION 
 
 the valuo of ideal circumstances than the other. (Note espe- 
 cially the words tv cua-nep iv vyieivo) tottio oIkovvtzs oi vioi faro 
 irai'Tos uxpeXQvrai, biroOev av avrols emu tG>v Ka\u>v epyo)V 7) 7rpo? 
 o\}/lv i] irpbs o.ko/]V tl -npoo-fiaXji, ctxnrep avpa (j)€povaa aub XP r l" 
 (jtG)V TOTTOiV vyUiav, koX evdvs ck Ttaiboov XavOavrj ets o/xoidnjra re 
 kcu (pikcav Kal ^vpxjmviav rw /caAw Ao'yw ayovrra — Rep. 3, 40 1 a) 
 
 (6.) Plato often allows a theory which he has formally re- 
 jected to influence the after-course of the discussion. Thus 
 in commenting on the Theastetus it was observed that the 
 theory of " impressions " although discarded is afterwards 
 applied (209 c, Ttplv av r) o-i/xdrris avrr} btacpopov tl p,vr\\x^iov 
 Trap" 1 qjiol €va-rnxr}vap.evr] K<na6r}TaL) : and in the Republic the 
 ideal of a simple life, which Socrates rejects in order to humour 
 Glaucon, and to account for the existence of a warrior caste, 
 insensibly returns. It might be thought that when the tale 
 was ended, and the error of " too great simplicity s " corrected, 
 we had done with the Divine Shepherd. But the idealizing 
 impulse is too strong. YVe have turned our faces resolutely 
 to look for the Statesman amongst mankind. But the light 
 which accompanies the search is from a higher world. And 
 when in comparison with the vision which our eyes have seen, 
 the actual statesmen of the earth appear contemptible or 
 monstrous, there still rises before us, in addition to the six 
 forms of government which experience recognizes, a seventh 
 form, which is no other than the Divine image 11 . The scenery 
 of the myth, the alternate cycles, the periodic destructions 
 from physical causes, the earth-born race, are as though they 
 had not been, but the ideal of true sovereignty still flits before 
 the eye of the mind 1 . This ideal, however, is now connected 
 with the postulate, that Statesmanship is a science, with which 
 the dialogue began : and it is sought to realize this with some 
 reference to the existing conditions of human society. 
 
 First, the actual forms of government are shewn not to be 
 based on any principle of reason ; yet it is assumed that, so 
 far as they are constitutional, they are unconsciously imitating, 
 
 s €vr}9€<TTepaTovSeovTos. Polit. 276 e. cipit se dormire, timet excitari, blan- 
 
 h Compare Descartes, Meditatio 1, disque illusionibus lente connivet, sic 
 
 sub fin. " Nee aliter quam captivus, sponte labor in veteres opiniones." 
 qui forte imaginaria" libertate fruebatur ' Compare the middle and end of 
 
 in somniis, quum postea suspicari in- the Phsedrus. 
 
TO THE STATESMAN xli 
 
 though with decreasing accuracy (here the influence of the 
 myth appears again k ), that Divine pattern of which the 
 sovereignty of knowlcdgo would be a conscious and perfect 
 imitation. Now a perfect imitation is no longer an imitation, 
 but the thing itself : and thus we return to our ideal image. 
 But this ideal is no longer merely abstract. The king as a 
 commanding artist is seen purging the community of incurably 
 bad elements, subduing tho refractory, and ordering aright 
 the diversities of excellence which exist amongst his noblest 
 subjects. His function is defined relatively to that of the 
 general, the judge, the orator; and the result of his rule is 
 not described as perfect happiness, but such happiness as is 
 possible for a community. The separation of Divine and 
 human which the myth suggests, is for the first time carried 
 out consistently in the Laws 1 , where the acknowledgment 
 reluctantly muttered out in the Politicus is fully made, namely, 
 that a paternal despotism has only once been realized, viz., 
 in the golden age when man lived under a theocracy; but 
 that human nature under existing conditions is too weak to 
 bear the temptations incident to absolute power. 
 
 IV. The Seven Forms of Government. 
 The subject of political constitutions is treated differently by 
 Plato in the Republic and the Laws. In the Republic the 
 ordinary threefold distinction of oligarchy, democracy, and 
 despotism is put into the mouth of Thrasymachus, who argues 
 from this that the strongest govern for their own ends. Plato 
 himself appends to his picture of the perfect state an ideal 
 picture of four successive forms of gradual deterioration from 
 this type, timocracy, oligarchy, democracy, and tyranny ; each 
 lower than the former, and arising out of it through a natural 
 development of evil. The ruling principle of the first is 
 honour, of the second Avealth, of the third individual freedom, 
 of the last passion. This arrangement is no doubt partly 
 determined by the analogy of the individual, which, in accord- 
 ance with the plan of the dialogue, is throughout kept promi- 
 
 k Polit. 273 b, Te\evTa>y 5e a/x&Xii- pressed in the Laws is the religious 
 
 repov. counterpart of the severance of the 
 
 1 4, 713. The sense of the distance ideal from the actual which is so 
 
 of man from God so frequently ex- strongly felt in the Politicus. 
 
xiu (vntonucT'- 
 
 nently in view. In the timocracy, wliich nearly corresponds 
 to the Laconian ideal, the spirited clement gains predominance, 
 and is emancipated from the control of the reason. In the 
 other three forms,, Desire, first, of wealth, secondly, of unre- 
 strained action, thirdly, of gratifying the ruling passion, has 
 the upper hand. 
 
 Three distinct arrangements are adopted in different places 
 of the Laws, all different from that just mentioned : — 
 
 i. The order of historical development. Legg. 3, 676-683. 
 
 a. Single families, without written laws. 0e/Lucrrevei 5e 
 
 e/caoros Tiaiha>v ?}8' ako^u>v o£S' a\Xi]\a)v aKeyovaup. 
 
 b. Patriarchal Government, Bao-i\eiW Tjaaav Smclio- 
 
 TaT7]V. 
 
 c. The early life of cities, in which opposite customs are 
 
 harmonized by legislation. 
 
 d. Maritime cities are built ; the beginning of commerce, 
 
 war, sedition. 
 
 e. Return of the Heraclids. Laconian and Cretan con- 
 
 stitutions. 
 
 2. Two prime forms, democracy and monarchy, representing 
 the tendencies of the West and East. The best constitution 
 must have an admixture of both, so as to secure order and 
 liberty. The Laconian and Cretan settlements had this good 
 fortune. Legg. 3, 691. 
 
 3. For the above-named reason, these alone of existing 
 governments deserve the name of noXiTda. The four com- 
 monly named, royalty, aristocracy, democracy, and tyranny, 
 are not constitutions, but factious coteries (oracncoreiai), which 
 govern, not for the interest of the state, but, as Thrasymachus 
 said, for the maintenance of the existing authority. The only 
 true constitution is that in which, instead of one part of the 
 city being in subjection to another part, all are together 
 subject to the rule of reason in the form of law. 
 
 In the Politicus we have first an enumeration of the forms 
 of government according to common notions : then a criticism 
 of these, followed by a fresh enumeration. 
 
 Common opinion is said to acknowledge five forms instead 
 of the three vaunted by Thrasymachus in Rep. bk. 1. Instead 
 
TO THE STAT sliii 
 
 of his "tyranny" we have the higher generalization of mon- 
 archy (tho word twvapxia occurs only in the Folitieus and the 
 Laws). This is subdivided into royalty and tyranny, according 
 as the subjects are Avilling or unwilling. Instead of his 
 "aristocracy" we have the more general ?} ittb twv 6kLyu>v 
 hwaaTtta, (cf. Legg. 7 10 c, okiyapyjia ri]v tov tolovtov, i.e. tov 
 vofJLoOerov, yivzcriv yakenuiTaTa bvvaiT b.v irpocrbtgacrOai' irkeurTot. 
 yap Iv avr% hwacrrai yiyvovTCLi) : which is divided, according to 
 the principle of wealth on tho one hand, and constitutionalism 
 on the other, into oligarchy and aristocracy "of fair name" 
 {ti]v ev(avvp.ov). The fifth is democracy, which, whether ruling 
 by gentleness or violence, and whether constitutional or not, 
 has the same name. 
 
 But when tried by the standard of scientific government, 
 not one of these is found to be based on principle : they are 
 seen not to be forms of government at all (ov TroAireicu), but 
 only imitations more or less remote of the one true form ; 
 and the men who head them are not statesmen, but partisans, 
 the phantom-guardians of phantom-states. 
 
 Of the imitations however, some are better, some are worse. 
 And here a principle is admitted which had no place in the 
 perfect state. The better or worse of the bad states are 
 distinguished by the observance or defiance of law. All else 
 is accident, except the original wisdom of the Laws, and the 
 degree in which they are obeyed. Hence the original classi- 
 fication is thus modified. First, the scientific state is alone 
 allowed the name, so that the five are swallowed up in one 
 (to, nivTG dvojjMTa tG>v vvv keyopiivaiv TtokiTuG>v £v p.6vov yiyovev)- 
 But of the false states there are now 
 
 1. Monarchy with law, 2. Monarchy without law, 
 
 called fiatnXtta. TvpavvCs. 
 
 3. The dynasty of a few 4. The dynasty of a few 
 
 observing the laws = defying the laws = 
 
 apio-TOKparia. okiyapyjia. 
 
 5. Democracy with law. 6. Democracy without law. 
 
 The true state being kept apart, &<rnep 6tbs e£ cwOpwrnav, 
 the following is the order of excellence, or rather of com- 
 parative badness amongst the other six : — 
 
 * o' 2 
 
xIin INTRODUCTION 
 
 1. fiacnXeLa ( i ). 
 
 2. apLCTTOKparia (3). 
 
 3. hrnj.0Kpa.TLa p.€Ta vopnav (5)- 
 
 4. h-jp-OKparla tu>ev vopcav (6). 
 
 5. oAr/apx''" (4)- 
 
 6. tv pawls (2). 
 
 Now this order differs at the first glance in two important 
 respects from that given in the eighth and ninth hooks of the 
 Republic. These are, first, the addition of /3ao-i\eta as one 
 of the lower forms, and, secondly, the depression of dkiyapyj-a 
 below br]iJ.0KpaT[a. 'Ayoioro/cparta may be allowed to correspond 
 to the TifioKparCa of the Republic. But it so happens that on 
 both these points there is a corresponding difference between 
 the Republic and the Laws. For in that dialogue, as we have 
 seen, j3ao-iKe(a (a sort of eastern monarchy is probably intended) 
 is one of the four forms commonly received to which the Athe- 
 nian Stranger denies the name of constitution. And demo- 
 cracy, as one of the two " mother polities'''' of which monarchy 
 is the other, is throughout placed before oligarchy, against 
 which Plato seems latterly to have conceived an increased 
 enmity. (Even in the Republic he calls it o~vxvG>v yipiova-a 
 KaK&v 7roAtreta.) 
 
 When we add to these two points the coincidences of 
 language above mentioned {p.ovapyj-a, hwaaTeia), a presump- 
 tion is raised that the doctrine of the Politicus on this subject 
 is nearer to the Laws than to the Republic. 
 
 And on coming a little closer, we see that in the Republic 
 these distinctions are thought to depend on essential differences 
 of form (4, 445 d, dbrj fyovTes ; 8, 544 d, rj ti$ ko\ iv dbet 
 bia(pavet tivi Ketrcu), and to have a natural order of sequence 
 of which a reason can be given. But in the Politicus they 
 are seen to be distinguished by no principle, the only real 
 difference between states being first enlightenment or igno- 
 rance in the ruler, and next the maintenance or the neglect 
 of law. And not far removed from this view, though more 
 adapted to a legislative treatise, is the assertion in the Laws 
 that the constitutions commonly so called are not constitutions 
 at all, and that the only true state is that where reason rules 
 in the form of law. Once more, when in the Politicus the 
 
TO THE STATESMAN. xlv 
 
 statesmen of existing states are said to be not what they pro- 
 fess, lmt partisans (otj ttoAltlkoi d\\a o-raa-taortKot), this comes 
 very near the remark in the Laws that the radical vice of all 
 the received forms of government except the .Spartan and 
 Cretan is that one part rules the rest for its own advantage. 
 They arc not constitutions but coteries (ov 7roAiTe«u, dAAa 
 o-rao-twreiat) . 
 
 V. Theory of Legislation. 
 
 The presumption thus raised is further confirmed when we 
 examine the very curious piece of mingled satire and inquiry in 
 which the distinction between constitutional and unconstitutional 
 government is illustrated. " If the true sovereign and law- 
 giver, or a second like him, were on earth/' we are told, " he 
 would be above law ; which is only an imperfect substitute 
 for the universal and immediate superintendence of the Per- 
 fect Will/ - ' The physician is not bound to follow his old pre- 
 scriptions under altered circumstances. But now he is " gone 
 into a far country/'' or, as the myth would say, Providence 
 has left us to ourselves : and men have despaired of finding 
 their natural ruler, whom, when once found, they would follow 
 like a swarm of bees. Therefore there is nothing left to them 
 but to preserve their country's laws, which, it may be pre- 
 sumed, were made at first after the Divine pattern, so far as 
 those who framed them knew. What a poor business this is 
 at best is shewn by the case of an imaginary state, in which 
 the arts of navigation and medicine or any others should be 
 practised according to ancient laws enacted in popular or 
 oligarchical assemblies at the advice of chance persons. But 
 w T hen the wretchedness of such a condition has been fully 
 exhibited, a lower deep is opened, by imagining a state, 
 whether democratical, oligarchical, or tyrannical, in which 
 such laws, however imperfect, should be over-borne, not by 
 higher knowledge, but by private gain or favour. Hence 
 it is concluded that in the absence of a philosophic ruler, the 
 best course possible (as a hzvrtpos nXovs) is a strict observance 
 of the laws. Now in the Republic, the sanguine founders of 
 that city in the heavens deliberately dispense with a minute 
 
xlvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 code of laws. These aro thought unnecessary because in the 
 greatest thing, viz. education, the whole community will be 
 spontaneously obedient to the philosopher-king, and in little 
 things those who have been thus educated will bo a law to 
 themselves ; or in any case will be only what education 
 makes them. The pages in which this thought is expressed 
 (4, 423 e — 427 a), had they not been found in an earlier 
 writing, might have been taken for a criticism of the Leges. 
 It is indeed granted, in words which should acquit Plato of 
 Utopianism (5, 472 b — 473 b), that practice can never attain 
 to the perfection of theory, but the idea of lowering the sails 
 of theory, in order to try a second course, when the first 
 is hopeless, does not occur to Socrates, and certainly would be 
 very far from acceptable to the impetuous Glaucon. 
 
 The necessity of this humbler course is somewhat sadly 
 admitted by the Athenian Stranger in the Laws. He prefaces 
 the introduction of the very class of regulations (those which 
 are over and above the rules for nurture and education), 
 against which Socrates protests in the passage above quoted 
 (9, 875 a), with the remark that laws are necessary, because 
 no human being has at once the wisdom to see, and also the 
 power and the will to do, at every moment what is for the 
 universal interest, and to make his own interest always 
 secondary. " Could one be found theoretically convinced that 
 whatever was for the public good was on the whole good 
 for him, yet, if placed in a position of absolute and irrespon- 
 sible authority, he would be too weak to apply his theory 
 consistently through a long life. His mortal nature shrinking 
 from pain and desiring pleasure would darken his judgment 
 of what is just and good. But if Providence were to send on 
 earth such a nonpareil, whose nature was sufficient for this 
 work, he would not need to place himself under the control 
 of law. (Compare Polit. 295 b, (rx°^V <*v kavTu Oeir e/x7ro8tV- 
 juara ypd(p(av tovs Xe^Oivras tovtovs vop.ovs.) It is because 
 Nature has been so niggardly in this particular {vvv h\ — ov 
 yap Zcttiv ovbapov ovbap-m, aAA' rj Kara (3pax.v) that we are 
 forced to adopt a course which is only second-best, in enacting 
 laws, whose application is general only, not universal." 
 
 The reflection which prompts these words, viz. that prac- 
 tical rules must be accommodated to our experience of human 
 
TO THE STATESMAN. xlvii 
 
 weakness, pervades the whole dialogue, and should always be 
 present to the reader of the Laws. It docs not follow that 
 Plato has relinquished his ideal of life, because in recommend- 
 ing a second-best polity to those who have refused his best, 
 he admits some details which he had once rejected with 
 scorn m . The feeling with which he does so could not be more 
 clearly expressed than in the words with which he defends 
 the admission within certain limits of election by lot: to yap 
 
 €TTL€LK€S KCtl £vyjV(s)}XOV TOV TtktOV KCU (XKpl.(3oVS TiapCL hUl)V T1]V 
 
 6p0i]V eort TrapaT£0pau(xeVoi', orav yiyvrjTai n . 
 
 This procedure follows naturally as a practical result from 
 the reasoning in the Politicus. If, seeing that the philosopher- 
 king cannot always be with his people, the only wise course for 
 states is to maintain their laws, which have an imperfect and 
 remote reflection of principles of divine government: suppose 
 an occasion to arise for founding a new state, or some rare 
 opportunity for remodelling an old one , what are the laws 
 which, as the best possible substitute for the continual presence 
 of an enlightened will, the true law-giver would actually 
 impose? and what are their reasons and their sanctions? 
 This is the problem which the Stranger in the Politicus im- 
 plicitly suggests, but apparently despairs of answering : for 
 the sketch with which the dialogue ends represents the highest 
 statesmanship working without the instrumentality of law, 
 though in a more practical way than in the Republic. 
 
 m See esp. Legg. 5, 739 b : rb 5' states built on foundations which 
 
 iartv opBdrara, el-rrelv /xev r-qv apiari]v reason pronounces ruinous, provokes 
 
 TroAireiav kizI Sevripuv Ktxl Tpiri^v, 8ov- the reflection "what strength and 
 
 vat Se elir6vra aipeaiv ktt&VTcp t£ t?/S tenacity there is in the very nature of 
 
 crvvotKTicrtcos Kvp(w. a state" (&is i<rx u P^ v TL ""<^'S itrrl 
 
 n Another admission to which he <pvcrei). 
 confesses himself almost driven (4, ° This in the Laws is not the rise 
 708 e) is, that " constitutions are not of a philosopher-king, but the con- 
 made, but grow" (us ovSeis irore currence of a well-disposed and intelli- 
 avQp&irwv ovSev vofx.o9ere7, rvxai 8e gent despot with a wise law-giver. It 
 ical ^v/xcpopal iravroiai iriirTovaai irav- should be observed that a provision is 
 toi'ois vofxoOeTovvt to. TravTo. rjjj.7v). A made in Legg. 6, 769, 77° ( c f- I2 > 
 noticeable passage, in which human 951), though by no means an adequate 
 art occupies only the third place with provision, for the constitutional amend- 
 Providence and chance. There is an ment of the law. This is a step in 
 approach to a similar feeling in Polit. advance of the political doctrine of the 
 302 a, where the longevity of many Statesman. 
 
xlviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 An instructive parallel to the teaching of the Politicus 
 on this subject appears in the Critias, in which three phases 
 of political life arc described, which nearly exemplify the 
 Elcatic Stranger's theory. First the people of prc-historic 
 Athens, whose autochthon founders, created by Hephaestus 
 and Athena, had been inspired by them to order their state" 
 (as wc learn from the opening of the Timasus) in accordance 
 with the provisions of the Republic. Next the kings of the 
 race of Poseidon, each of whom had power of life and death 
 in his own city, but was bound in his intercourse with the 
 rest to obey the injunctions of their progenitor, as these had 
 been recorded by the first of their race. These had remained 
 unaltered as they were written in the beginning on a tablet 
 of orichalcumi (a now fabulous metal which abounded in that 
 realm). On this tablet was added a great curse pronounced 
 on those who disobeyed: and a great oath, confirmed by the 
 blood of a bull poured over the tablet, was renewed every five 
 years : at which time also, in solemn nocturnal conclave, they 
 condemned those who were convicted of ruling contrary to 
 the laws. For many generations, so long as they observed 
 these laws, and while the heroic blood remained in therm 
 they lived happily enough, and perceiving that virtue is the 
 true road even to earthly welfare, they bore up against the 
 load of their material prosperity. But a time came when 
 the human element prevailed and they were overcome by 
 ambition and the pride of power. Then they seemed out- 
 wardly most fortunate, but presented a pitiable spectacle to 
 those who had an eye for deformity of soul. The fragment 
 of the Critias ends with the resolve of Zeus to chasten them, 
 but had the tale proceeded, we should have had placed 
 before us the third companion picture, that of the misery of 
 a state which, in the absence of a philosophic ruler, has a 
 code of laws but is disobedient to them. These three con- 
 ditions, set forth in the Critias, correspond nearly to the forms 
 which the Politicus recognizes as alone essential : the Republic 
 is ignorant of the distinction between the second and third : 
 which, again, are brought into almost exclusive prominence 
 in the Laws. 
 
 p Critias, 109 d. 1 Compare the Kvpfeis of Polit. I. c. 
 
TO TIIH STATESMAN. 
 
 . VI. Relation of the Politicus to the Leges. 
 
 I. The description of the "Royal web" in the concluding 
 
 passage of this dialogue is a more outline; yet if the sketch 
 is anywhere finished this is not done in the Republic, but in 
 the Laws. These both contain the idea of binding together 
 and harmonizing the gentle and fierce elements in human 
 nature: and the presence of this thought in the Politicus is, 
 in so far, only a reason for grouping it with these two great 
 works rather than with the Protagoras or any of the more 
 Socratic dialogues, in which all virtue is simply referred to 
 knowledge. But a more definite hypothesis is justified by 
 a closer inspection. For, while the "divine bond" of know- 
 ledge is a description so vague as to be equally applicable to 
 either of the two imaginary schemes of education, the provisions 
 respecting marriage which constitute the " human bonds " 
 have no counterpart in the Republic, while they are re- 
 peated almost without modification in the Laws. They 
 imply in fact an accommodation to the existing condition of 
 mankind which is more in accordance with the spirit of the 
 latter than of the former dialogue. For "what need was 
 there of uniting by mutual pledges those who never spoke of 
 "I" or " mine/'' and who felt every grief of every member 
 of the state with an individual sorrow? What need of 
 qualifying opposite tendencies by intermarriage, when each 
 individual, according to the principle on which he was selected 
 and trained, had by nature and education the harmony of 
 gentleness and courage within his own breast? This ideal 
 polity is still acknowledged by the speaker in the Laws to be 
 the one and only pattern. His object is to propound a second 
 polity, i. c. a polity only once removed from the former, the 
 closest imitation of the perfect government that is likely to be 
 maintained without the presence of a succession of Divine 
 kings. And his procedure, with the reasons for it, has several 
 striking points of resemblance to that suggested at the con- 
 clusion of the present dialogue. 
 
 He observes that the purpose of the early legislators was 
 not war, but peace as the reward of virtue : that in the early 
 *h 
 
1 INTRODUCTION 
 
 life of cities it became necessary to bring together the opposite 
 qualities of gentleness and fierceness, which, during the patri- 
 archal period, had become embodied in the traditions of the 
 different clans. (3, 681 b, KoapLKoTepaiv p.\v KocrpLutrepa, kol 
 avhpiK&v avhpiKwrtpa. Cf. ib. 691 e, of the Spartan constitu- 
 tion. Compare Polit. 310 c.) And in beginning his own 
 legislation he compares the work he has to do (almost in the 
 words of our dialogue) to a web composed of a warp and woof, 
 of which the warp is stronger and so far better, having a 
 certain firmness of disposition, but the woof is softer and has 
 " a certain temperance which gives it smoothness." (Cf. 
 Polit, 282 e, 309 b. In the Laws the highest rule is given 
 to the stronger element.) But there is an earlier process to 
 be gone through before this is begun. The state must be 
 purged of all bad elements. Plato thinks worse of human 
 nature than when he hoped that all children under ten years old 
 with a few exceptions would receive the print of the new laws. 
 (Rep. 7, sub. fin.) The purgation of the flock from tainted 
 members must precede all else. If the legislator have supreme 
 power, human kindness need not prevent him from taking the 
 nearest way. Otherwise he may have recourse to the more 
 " euphemious " plan of emigration. (5, 735. Compare with 
 this Polit. 293 d, e, 308 b-d.) 
 
 Once more, in applying the ideal which annihilates indi- 
 vidual choice to the matter of marriage, this exhortation is 
 made to precede the law. " The man must choose a partner 
 not superior to himself in wealth : and, moreover, he who is 
 conscious of a quick and forward spirit (trajuwrepoy ajj.a /ecu 
 Oclttov tov biovTos irpbs Trdcras ras -npageis (pe.p6p.evov) should 
 seek alliance with a family of gentle blood (Koo-piioov -naripav 
 ylyvecrOai KTjSeor?^) : and he of the opposite temper should 
 take the opposite course. For each should choose that 
 marriage, not which is most pleasant to him, but which is 
 most expedient for the common weal. Now natural inclination 
 carries men to mate with their likes : the result of which is 
 to accumulate differences both of fortune and character, to 
 the manifest harm of cities. The motive of our injunction is 
 that the state may be like a well-attempered bowl, in which 
 the wine sparkles with maddening heat, but is chastened into 
 smooth mellowness by the sober influence of a different power.'" 
 
TO THE STATESMAN. li 
 
 (^» 773-) ft would be superfluous to draw out at length the 
 many close resemblances between this passage and p. 310 of 
 the Politicus. 
 
 2. The affinities of thought and doctrine, as well as of 
 language, which we have found existing between this dialogue 
 and the Laws, make it probable that the times of their com- 
 position were not very far apart : and Socher's objection, that 
 the Politicus agrees neither with the Republic nor with earlier 
 dialogues, is met by the hypothesis that this dialogue is inter- 
 mediate between the Republic and the Laws. To this, how- 
 ever, it may be again objected, that while the Politicus and its 
 immediate predecessor, the Sophistes, are amongst the most 
 dialectical of the whole series, the very notion of dialectic in 
 the Platonic sense is absent from the work on which the last 
 years of Plato's life were spent. Nor is this peculiarity of his 
 latest dialogue wholly to be accounted for by the nature of 
 the subject. Although the method of the Republic is less 
 exact than that of the Sophist or Philebus, yet the ideal 
 theory which it contains is professedly made the groundwork 
 of the political fabric, and Dialectic, as the science of ideas, 
 and as the roof and crown of the sciences, which are them- 
 selves viewed in their ideal aspect, is described as the in- 
 dispensable completion of the education of the ruler. Nor yet 
 will this further explanation suffice, that the Laws profess to 
 take a lower ground and starting-point, and to provide only 
 for what is second-best : and that hence, in the education of 
 the vono<pv\aK€s, the principles of the highest method are 
 economically withheld. For no one can read the tenth book 
 or the latter part of the seventh book of the Laws without 
 perceiving that here at least the law-giver is enunciating what 
 he conceives to be the highest truths. Yet, while much is 
 said of geometry and astronomy, and of the supremacy of 
 mind, no hint is given, either here or in the previous reference 
 to the Republic and the communion of goods, of any " doctrine 
 of ideas/' Notions of astronomy and psychology, more or 
 less definite, asserted with religious warmth, appear to have 
 taken the place of metaphysical inquiry. The exoteric form 
 of the discussion, implying a wish to reconcile philosophy to 
 Greek feeling, is inseparable from the phase of thought which 
 prompted this desire. 
 
lii INTRODUCTION 
 
 But while nothing is said of the ideas as objects of know- 
 ledge, there remain frequent traces of the method of division 
 and combination (bLaipccns, (rvvayo>yr)) as pursued in these dia- 
 logues. The duty of dividing according to the natural kinds 
 is enforced in the following, amongst other passages : 2, 658 a, 
 pi] Tayy to tolovtov Kptvwfxev, dAAa btaipovvres avrb Kara p.ipr] 
 iTKoiru>\iz.Qa: 6, 751 a, bvo tlbi] ravra irepl 7roAireia? Koop.ov 
 yiyv6p.zva Tvy\avti : 7, 814 e, bvo p.\v avTijs elbr] ^pj) vop.t(eiv 
 ilvai .... Kal -nakiv tov (jiavkov re bvo Kal tov o-novbaiov bvo 
 crepa : 10, 895 d, eari ttov Si^a biatpovpevov Iv aAAoi? re koI 
 iv apL0p.<2: 12, 944 b, ay^ebbv ovv ii> toIs oveibeaiv e'xet Tiva 
 Topvi]i> 7} tovt(i)v tG>v dvop.6.Tu>v £iri(pop&, where the phraseology 
 of the Sophistes is repeated. Instances of the converse process, 
 by which things apparently diverse are brought under one 
 conception, are 7, 824 a, the description of the various kinds 
 of OriptvTiKr}, which has several points of resemblance to these 
 dialogues ; 8, 841 c, 'kv yivos ov, irtpikafibv ra rpia yevrj : 
 10, 894 b, &)? kv elbecri Xafie'iv : 12, 944 c, Kaipol Awews veW r\ 
 (&OV TLVOS, OVS ZVTOVOVS T€ Kal VlTO&pLaTa Kal vevpoov Z-kitovovs, 
 piav ovcrav (pvatv bLeo-napixivqv, ttoWcl^ov ttoXKoIs 6v6]j.aaL irpoa- 
 ayopevovo-Lv. Much also of the terminology which arose out of 
 the definitions of these dialogues is assumed in various places 
 of the Laws, as has been sufficiently shewn in the General 
 Introduction. 
 
 The anomaly which we are considering will appear less 
 wonderful, if we review the course which dialectical inquiry 
 has taken in our two dialogues. The chief result of the 
 Sophistes was the transition from a somewhat fanciful onto- 
 logy to a true psychology, from a transcendental to a logical 
 conception of Being ; first as the sum of positive determina- 
 tions, then as the sum or ideal of true determinations, 
 whether affirmative or negative. We have seen that this 
 conception finds legitimate development in the Politicus in 
 more complex views of knowledge and of the objects of know- 
 ledge, which must be seen in various aspects and relations 
 before they are fully known. The true affinities and discre- 
 pancies of things are perceived by the higher faculty of the 
 mind, not after a cursory glance at phenomena, but through 
 a laborious process only made possible after long training. 
 Science is the comprehension of these deeper resemblances 
 
TO THE STATESMAN. liii 
 
 and differences: and scientific inquiry is the interrogation of 
 all nature in order to discover what each kind can contribute 
 to the store of universal knowledge. Tho only passages which 
 remind us of the ontological or transcendental theory of the 
 ideas are the /xerpLov (jiwij in p. 284, and the contrast between 
 sensible and logical analogies in p. 286 a. Now the former of 
 these is the exact expression of the philosophy which seeks to 
 combine the absolute with the relative, as Plato seeks to com- 
 bine these in the Philebus ; and the latter belongs to the 
 antithesis between the things of mind and of sense, which is 
 nowhere more strongly asserted than in the tenth book of the 
 Laws. Even the ideal standard of to /uirpioi; is hardly con- 
 ceived as existing apart from production (284 d, -npbs Tip rod 
 fxerpLov yivecnv). Indeed, throughout the dialogue (see also 
 Soph. 245 d) the Eleatic opposition between Being and Be- 
 coming, and also between Knowledge and Opinion, appears to 
 be softened, and even here and there obliterated. 
 
 There is a sense, therefore, in which it may be truly said 
 that, in these dialogues, metaphysical inquiry has been en- 
 gaged in " getting rid of metaphysics/'' i. e. of transcendental 
 ontology. The idea of scientific method takes the place of 
 the mere enthusiastic exaltation of the ideas. That method is 
 still held to be the privilege of a mind fitted by nature and 
 training to discern ideas ; to discern them, however, not merely 
 in themselves, but amidst the manifold complexities of the real 
 world. 
 
 Hence we need not wonder that in a dialogue later than the 
 Politicus, the notion of an intellectual region, wholly separated 
 from that of appearance and opinion, which stands out so 
 prominently in the Republic, does not reappear. 
 
 It is true that the chief interest in the Politicus is dialectical, 
 in the Laws ethical and religious. But this, at all events, may 
 be traced partly to the difference between a speculative and a 
 practical treatise. As Plato himself says of his ideal state, 
 (JMjauv eyet Trpa^LV \e£ttos t/ttov dArj^etaj itpdirTecrOaL. There is 
 an analogous contrast between the Phasdrus and the Republic. 
 In the infancy of the sciences, the development of a perfect 
 method, and its application to a particular subject-matter, were 
 achievements equally impossible. Practice and theory could 
 not go hand in hand. As the method was necessarily immature 
 
liv INTRODUCTION 
 
 (though rich in anticipative insight), so it was destined to 
 remain unrealized. Plato often betrays his consciousness of 
 this. He fails to seize "waking" the form which he had 
 pursued "in a dream." At the same time it is not contended 
 that the Politicus may not have been produced many years 
 before the Leges were begun. In that last dialogue the 
 method of inquiry which, theoretically at least, still rules in 
 the Statesman and Sophist, has given place to what is virtually 
 a method of exposition ; and the author's mind seems in both 
 cases to be wholly possessed by the impulse which is dominant 
 for the time. It is hardly credible that two such different 
 modes of handling the same subject should have reigned 
 simultaneously, and therefore it is best to suppose an interval. 
 But this supposition does not weaken the force of the cumu- 
 lative arguments by which it has been now sought to deter- 
 mine approximately the relative position of this dialogue 
 amongst the writings of Plato. And in the occasional 
 abruptness and absence of connexion in the Politicus there are 
 not wanting symptoms of the approaching loss of dialectical 
 as well as of artistic freshness and power. 
 
 VII. References to the Politicus in Aristotle. 
 
 That Aristotle was acquainted with this dialogue appears 
 from many coincidences of thought and expression. Several 
 instances, chiefly from the Politics, will occur in the notes. 
 (See especially, besides the passage mentioned below, Ar. Pol. 
 
 I, i, oool [xev .... [XLKpav ttoXlv (cf. Polit. 259 a — c) : ibid., 
 ayeXaiov (coov : ibid. 2 sub fin., rj be kti^tlki] OrjpevTLKrj : 
 
 II, 5> °^ ov laTpiKT) djuoiws £x etv ( c ^ Polit- 298) : ibid. 7, 
 
 to /x?/ Kara ypappiaTa frpyeiv, aXX' avToyi>(6p,ovas, iinacpaXes : 
 
 III, 2, "Ecrri yap apxv becrnoTLKij biaKOVMas -npageis (cf. 
 
 Polit. 259 c — 260 c, 304) : ibid. 6, larpos b" 1 . . . . rots dbocnv 
 (cf. Polit. 259 a) : ibid. 8, axnrep yap debv ev avOpcairoLs (cf. 
 
 Polit. 303 b) : ibid. 10, bone? brj toXs vop.i(ovo-i apyziv 
 
 rj\i0Lov: IV, 12, apxp-s XeKTeov Tavras, oaais a7roSeSorai fiovXev- 
 oacrQai re Ttepi rtvoov Kal Kplvai koI k-nira^ai, nal jwaAicrra tovto, 
 to yap l-niTo.TTt.lv dpxtKwrepoV Igtiv (cf. Polit. 260 a) : VII, 13, ei 
 
TO THE STATESMAN. lv 
 
 ixkv toLvvv apxtw kciI upxeaOat (cf. Polit. 301 d). It is 
 
 true that, considering the common atmosphere of philosophical 
 debate which surrounded both writers, these resemblances do 
 not amount to proof; but they render it probable that Ari- 
 stotle had read the dialogue and was familiar with some of its 
 contents. Hence it is the more strange that in the one place 
 in which he appears to refer directly to the Politicus, he not 
 only omits the author's name (this would be no new pheno- 
 menon), but gives him the vague designation ns t&v irpoTepov, 
 "one of those who have preceded me." The passago occurs 
 in the second chapter of Book IV, where the question is 
 raised, which of the declensions (7rapeK,3dcreis) from the true 
 forms of government is the least bad ? and is as follows : 
 lieTpiooT&Tiiv be ti]v brjpoKpariav. 7/877 p.ev ovv tis a-necpijvaTO kcu 
 ray irporepov ovras, ov fx-qv eh tolvto fiXexjms i]\uv e/ceiros p.ev 
 yap expive, iraaQv p.ev ovcruv e7neiKcoi>, olov 6\iyap\(as re XPW 7 ^ 
 /ecu tu>v aXXav, xeiplaTriv h-jp.OKpaTiav, (pavXtav be apicrTi]v. The 
 superficial relevancy of this to Polit. 303 a, b is sufficiently 
 obvious. We may notice, however, that, as usual with him in 
 quoting Plato, Aristotle has forgotten the connexion. Plato 
 condemns as strongly as Aristotle all the forms of government 
 here mentioned. With him also it is a question not of good 
 and bad, but of degrees of badness : rls — tS>v ovk opO&v ttoXl- 
 TeiG>v tovtoov {JKLcrra xaXeTir) wCv v > Tia-v&v X a ^ €7T ® v ovacov, kcu 
 tls (3apvTarri ; — and it may be that Aristotle's three "right 
 forms" would have fared no better at his hands. The word 
 eirieiK&v, which Aristotle attributes to him, is not used at all ; 
 the nearest approach to such an expression is Koaixiav, which 
 is explained by vofxifjL<ov, and is probably used, as /^erpicoTOTTiy 
 is used by Aristotle, in order to avoid a word implying posi- 
 tive excellence. For when monarchy is said to be apiarr] twv 
 e£, and democracy i:apav6p.(i>v /3eArioT77, this is only in the 
 same relative sense in which Aristotle uses the words cpavXcov 
 apia-Trjv. Indeed, were Aristotle's representation true, the 
 two philosophers would be more nearly at accord : for demo- 
 cracy would then be described by Plato as the least bad of 
 three bad forms, each of which is (in this case) the declen- 
 sion from a species of right government. This kind of inac- 
 curacy is too common to afford any ground for the con- 
 jecture that Aristotle is not referring to the Politicus, but 
 
hi INTRODUCTION 
 
 to some other writing or utterance of a previous thinker' 1 , 
 but it lessens the wonder which is naturally excited by the 
 careless vagueness of the expression " some one in former 
 time." 
 
 When we consider how much more Aristotle seems to have 
 relied on the living tradition of Plato's school than on his 
 writings for the opinions of Plato; how lax he is in quotation 
 generally, attributing to Circe the words of Ulysses to his 
 pilot, and the like ; how impersonal he is ; how seldom he 
 names Plato, though often alluding to him ; when we re- 
 member that in all his writings there is no distinct reference 
 to such a noticeable work as the Parmcnidcs, w t c need hardly 
 be surprised if, at the moment of writing these lines, he was 
 not clearly aware which of all the previous speculators on the 
 subject of politics had pronounced this opinion. It would be 
 easy to indulge in further conjecture, but it is needless. The 
 anomaly remains. The fact is singular, though not unaccount- 
 able. But, if what has been said in these pages has any force, 
 this would indeed be slender evidence on which to question the 
 genuineness of the Statesman. This dialogue is fastened by 
 too many threads of contrast, as well as of resemblance, to the 
 place which has been now assigned it in the Platonic canon, 
 to be dropped from thence by the mere negligence of Plato's 
 younger contemporary r . 
 
 VIII. The " Philosopher " dialogue. 
 
 The " Statesman" contains a sketch of the real as well of 
 the counterfeit ruler. The " Sophist" was mainly occupied in 
 proving the existence of a counterfeit of the philosopher. The 
 last and (according to the "geometrical" proportion indicated 
 in Polit. sub. init.) by far the greatest part of the Stranger's 
 
 <l This view is, however, worth con- r I cannot think that Ueberweg has 
 
 sidering, and is somewhat favoured by made out the theory which he advances 
 
 the expression tis tSiv irpoTepwv. In in connexion with this question, viz., 
 
 this case, Plato might be included in that when in a quotation of Plato 
 
 Vfuv, and Aristotle might, as in so Aristotle uses the past tense he always 
 
 many other instances, be merely repeat- alludes to a spoken utterance, 
 ing a doctrine of his master's. 
 
TO THE STATKSM \\ lvii 
 
 task remains: viz. the definition of the true philosopher. 
 
 That Plato intended to complete this series with a dialogue 
 in which the Eleatic Stranger and Therotetufl should he the 
 interlocutors and Socrates the listener appears from the 
 opening sentences of the " Statesman'''' compared with Soph. 
 217 a, 231 a(?), 253 c, 254 h : although in the two last-named 
 passages it is possihlo after the fact to detect a tone of hesita- 
 tion (eav (r)rSiiiev, av hi /SovAo/xeVots r/jiuv ?]). No such dialogue, 
 however, and no mention of such a dialogue is extant, and it 
 is next to impossihlc that a picture of the ideal philosopher, 
 drawn by Plato's hand, should never have received a passing 
 notice in all literature. But it has been supposed that 
 although not literally fulfilled, the intention here expressed 
 may have been carried out by Plato in a different way. It 
 was the opinion of Schleiermacher that in the Symposium and 
 Phoedo the promised portrait of the philosopher is given to 
 us in the person of Socrates. It is unnecessary to refute 
 at length a supposition so gratuitous. The reader of the 
 preceding pages will perhaps be satisfied with the remark, 
 that even were the withdrawal of the person of Socrates of no 
 significance, and could the artistic freshness of Plato's literary 
 prime be recalled at will, we cannot suppose that after writing 
 the Sophistes, he would have returned to the phase of the 
 ideal theory which is implied in Symp. 211 c, d, or in Pha3do 
 75, 100. More plausible but not less baseless is the opinion 
 of Stallbaum, who finds the missing dialogue in the Parme- 
 nides. If it were necessary to make the hypothesis at all, 
 there is no dialogue which could more fitly be drawn into 
 this group. It contains a criticism and modification of Eleatic 
 doctrine which presents many analogies to the Sophistes, 
 and if, as the Politicus teaches, human things are only worth 
 studying for the sake of dialectical improvement, no better 
 training than that given in the Parmenides could be desired. 
 Yet this is regarded by the speaker as a preparatory exercise, 
 and the result is negative merely. The Parmenides is de- 
 structive in the same sense in which the Theaetetus is destruc- 
 tive. Now it is very improbable that after giving a definition 
 of the Sophist and the Statesman with which the speakers 
 appear satisfied, Plato would have added to these a sceptical 
 solution of the problem, " What is the philosopher ?" Some 
 
Iviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 glimpses of a positive answer to this question are in fact 
 afforded us in Soph. 230, 253-4. I am inclined to think, 
 as has been hinted in the Introduction to the Sophist, that 
 the most natural place for the Parmenides is between the 
 Therctctus and the Sophistcs : and, at all events, that the 
 difficulties respecting the coexistence of the ideas with phe- 
 nomena, of the One with the Many, probably preceded the 
 solutions of these and cognate difficulties in the Philebus and 
 Sophist. 
 
 It may therefore be concluded that Plato's " Philosopher," 
 like Bacon's sixth book of his Instauratio, was never written. 
 It is idle to conjecture what, if written, it would have con- 
 tained. But we may be sure that a truer conception of its 
 intended scope may be gathered from the few brief hints given 
 in these dialogues than from the Symposium, Phaedo, or 
 Parmenides. 
 
 The chief problem which these hints suggest to us is the 
 nature of Being, conceived as the true combination and 
 separation of ideas (Soph. 254). Plato perhaps intended to 
 draw out at length the notion of dialectic, as he has briefly 
 sketched this in Soph. 253 d, 259 c, d, Polit. 285 a-c. He 
 clearly implies that it would be necessary in order to this 
 end to establish an idea of order or fitness (to ixirpiov). And 
 other metaphysical conceptions would doubtless have emerged 
 in the attempt to determine that, which Plato felt to have 
 so often escaped him, a perfect method (wpos ttjv Trepl avrb 
 rctKpt/3e? kirlhei^iv — Polit. 284 c). That this endeavour would 
 have occupied the main portion of the dialogue there can 
 be little doubt, and perhaps as little that the arid wastes 
 of abstract discussion would have been relieved by passages 
 of luxuriant beauty, in which the glory of the Philosopher 
 (now T finally distinguished from the Sophist and Statesman, in 
 whose likeness he had often appeared) would have been fully 
 declared, and the life which surveys from on high the lives 
 of men (Soph. 216), conversing with every creature to learn 
 what each has to tell of wisdom (Polit. 272 c), would have 
 been stripped of all ironical disguise and revealed in true 
 proportions to the discerning spirit. 
 
 Even these scanty indications of the intended scope of the 
 Philosopher perhaps betray one cause why such a dialogue was 
 
TO THE STATESMAN. lis 
 
 never written. To elaborate a perfect method of knowledge 
 in the infancy of science was impossible, and it may be that 
 Plato felt it to be impossible". Nor does it seem as if in any 
 age the mind of Plato could have found completeness or repose. 
 The ideal of science 
 
 . . . "is an arch, wherethro' 
 Gleams the untravelled world, whose margin fades 
 For ever." 
 
 And if our hypothesis of the comparatively late origin of 
 theso dialogues is correct, the non-appearance of the Philo- 
 sopher coincides with and renders more significant the aban- 
 donment of metaphysical inquiry in the Laws. 
 
 s " Res et suprk vires et ultrh, spes nostras collocara." — Bacon. 
 
nOAITIKOS 
 
 ta tot AiAAoror nposmiA 
 
 2QKPATH2, 0EOAOPO2, 3ENOS, 
 20KPATH2 O NEQTEP02. 
 
 257- 11 7ro\\r)v yapiv 6(pelXco croi rrjs QeaiTrjTov yvoopl- 5 
 crecos, co Qeodcope, a\xa koll r?;y tov ^evov. 
 
 0EO. Ta^a 8e ye, to ^cofcpare?, ocpeiArjcrei? two- Only a 
 
 , , y , N , , third part 
 
 Tr)? TpnrAacnaV) eirecoav tov re ttoAltlkov carepya- of our task- 
 
 , v r , is done : 
 
 (TtOVTOLl aOL KCU TOV (pLAOCTOCpoV. nay, not a 
 
 20. JUleV' OUTGO TOUTO, CO (j)l\e Qe68cOp€, (fir/ao/iev 10 the States- 
 
 » r 9 ^ v . \v\ man rises 
 
 aKt]K00T€? eivai tov Trepi AoytapLov^ koii to. yeco/xe- above the 
 
 \ / Sophist in 
 
 TplKCL KpClTlCTTOV; value and 
 
 5. *H — ££vov\ " I owe you a 
 thousand thanks, Theodoras, 
 both for the acquaintance I 
 have made with Thesetetus and 
 with the Stranger," ttjs Qeai.Tr]- 
 
 tov ajaa Kal rrjs tov £evov. Cf. 
 
 Theset. 145 c, d, Soph. 216. 
 yvaplfa does not occur in Plato 
 in the causative sense. Hence 
 the noun probably does not 
 mean " your making me ac- 
 quainted." 
 
 7. Taya 8e ye] "And pre- 
 sently you will owe me three 
 thousand." The argument of 
 the Thesetetus is not taken 
 
 into the calculation. This helps 
 to confirm the hypothesis that 
 there was a considerable inter- 
 val between the composition of 
 the Thetetetus and that of the 
 Sophist. But perhaps it is 
 only natural that the speakers 
 should not refer immediately 
 to the conversation of the pre- 
 vious day. Cf. infr. 258 a. 
 
 1 1 . aKrjKooTes elvai] The more 
 frequent use of the auxiliary 
 verb has been already noticed 
 as a peculiarity of Plato's later 
 style. 
 
2 
 
 IIAATQNOS 
 
 the Philo- 
 sopher 
 above the 
 
 Statesman 
 in more 
 than a geo- 
 metrical 
 ratio. 
 
 GEO. Owe, co *2coKpar€? ; 
 
 20. Ttov uvSpcov tizacTTOv *6ivT0$* Trjs terms' atjlas, 
 oi rfj TLfxrj irXeov [aXXr/Xcov] u(j)e(TTCicTii> ?; kclto. Ti]v 
 dvaXoyiav ti]v rr/9 v/JLerepas Te^vt]?. 
 s GEO. E?3 ye vri tov rj/ierepov 6eov, co ^LcoKpare?, 
 
 TOV "A/JL/ULCOVa, KOU SlKaLCO?, KOLL TTO.VV fieV 0VV fXVY}pLOVL- 
 
 kcos hrejrXrj^ds ploi to irep\ tovs XoyicrpLOvs dfiap- 
 Tyfia. kcu ere pcev dim. tovtcov elcravOis p.ereLp.C av 
 8' rjpiiv, co Ijeve, pLrjSapicos aTVOKapx^s yapi^opLevos, dXX 
 oetjr}?, etre tov ttoXltlkov dvSpa irpoTepov elre tov 
 (piXocrocpov irpoaipei, irpoeXopLevo? die^eXde. 
 
 SE. TavT, co QeoScope, 7roir)Teov iirearep anatj 
 ye eyKe^eiprjKapiev, ovk dirocrTOLTeov irp\v av avTcov 
 
 p. 2< 
 
 2. Tav dvSpoov] Cf. Soph, 
 221 d: rjyvorjKapev Tavftpos tov 
 avdpa ovra gvyyevr). The ideal 
 
 Sophist, Statesman, Philoso- 
 pher, are treated with fami- 
 liarity, as persons with whom 
 a transaction is being held. 
 
 2. *&Vro S *] All the MSS. 
 have Bevres, but the correction 
 of Heindorf is unquestionably 
 right. The corruption is pro- 
 bably due to uKrjKooTes preced- 
 ing. 
 
 Note the variety of expres- 
 sion in df-ias — TI/J.TJ. 
 
 3. ifkeov — depeardo-tv^ Cf. 
 Legg. 4, 722 b : ov dnrXa 6a- 
 repa rav irepcov hia<popa povov 
 els dperrjv ttjs ypetas. dWrjKcov 
 
 om. Bodl. An. 
 
 4. ttjv Trjs vpeTepas Te'x*"?s] 
 Sc. Tt]v yecopeTpiKrjv. 
 
 5. tov rjptTepov 8ebv — tov Aju.] 
 The reader is thus reminded 
 that Theodoras is from Gy- 
 rene* 
 
 6. Ka\ irdvv pev ovv pvrjpovi- 
 
 kw?] " And most certainly 
 
 with praiseworthy recollection." 
 Theodoras commends Socrates 
 as his pupil for remembering 
 the principle of geometrical 
 proportion. 
 
 8. kol ere pev] "Well, I must 
 seek some other opportunity 
 for my revenge." 
 
 9. xapi£6pevos] The word re- 
 cals the politeness of the first 
 interview, Soph. 217c: tt\v ye 
 
 7rpa>Tr]v alTrjaavTcov X^P iv ' lb. d : 
 to S' av crol pfj x a P L C*°~6ai nal 
 roTcrSe. 
 
 d\\' igijs, etre] For the in- 
 terruption of the sentence with 
 etre, cf. Theset. 156 e : XevKov, 
 etre £v\ov, etre ~\ido$ k.t.A. 
 
 12. TTOLrjTtov — aTrocrrare'oi/] For 
 
 the apposition, cf. Protag. 348 
 
 a : TOVS TOLOVTOVS poi SoKet xPV vat 
 IAip.elo~6ai epe re nal ae, KaTaOepe- 
 vovs tovs TTOirjTas avTovs 81 rjpmv 
 auTOiv tovs \6yovs TroielcrBai. The 
 
 inferior MSS. insert ko.\ before 
 ovk, probably from conjecture. 
 
 1 3. avTcov] " The matters in 
 hand." Compare the frequent 
 
riOAITIKOS. 
 
 Tirpos to re'Aos 1 eXdcofxev. aAAa yap irep\ Qeam-jTov 
 TovSe tl XPV $pav fie ; 
 
 GEO. Tov wept ; 
 
 3*E. AiavaTravacopev avTov /x€raAa/3cWe? avTov 
 tov avyyvfivao~Ti]v TovSe Sco/cpar?; ; ?; ncos crvpfiov- { 
 Xevei? ; 
 
 GEO. Ka.da.7rep elrre?, fieTakd/ifiave' veco yap 
 ovTe paov olaeTov iravTa ttovov dvaTravo/ievco. 
 
 20. Kal flTjV KLvSweveTOV, CO ij€l>€, a/JL(j)Q) iroOev 
 
 i/xol ^vyyeveiav eyeiv Tivd. tov fiev ye ovv vp.el.9 
 Kara ttjv tov TrpoacoTrov <Pvaiv o/iolov epol (j)aiveo-0ai 
 (paTe, tov 5' rjptv rj KXrjcrc? oficovv/io? ovaa Kal rj 
 irpoo-prjcris irape^eTai Tiva olKeioTrjTa. dec 8r) tovs 
 ye fjvyyevei? r)p.ds del irpoOvpcos Sid Xoycov dvayvco- 
 
 It in time 
 that The- 
 Betetua 
 shoul'l be 
 relieved : 
 and hia 
 compa- 
 nion, the 
 younger 
 Socrates, 
 who has 
 hitherto 
 °been a 
 silent lis- 
 tener, is 
 now encou- 
 raged by 
 his elder 
 namesake 
 to converse 
 with the 
 Stranger. 
 
 use of avra without a distinct 
 antecedent in Thucydides. 
 
 4. AiavaTravo-copev avTov] "Shall 
 
 we relieve him for awhile, by- 
 taking his comrade Socrates 
 here instead 1 ?" Either Theae- 
 tetus was to be the respondent 
 in the " Philosophus," which 
 is probable enough, or 81a here 
 receives something of the mean- 
 ing which it has in Bia8ex.opai, 
 " in turn." 
 
 5. trvyyvfivavrrjv\ Theaet. 1 44 
 e : av 8" apa rt roiovrov ye'vrjTai 
 (sc. r<» prjKei irava>v a^Gaipai^ Kai 
 rovhe Trapa\T)-*\t6i.u8a ~2asKpa.Tr), tov 
 ScDKparovs pev apmvvpov, ipbv he 
 7)AiKiu>Ti)v kcu o~vyyvpvao~Trjv, 0} 
 avvSiairoveiv per epov to. 7roWa 
 ovk dr)des. The word here, like 
 navTa tvovov below, implies men- 
 tal as well as bodily labour. 
 Cf. Eep. 6, 498 b : ■Kpo'iovo-rjs 
 
 he tt)s r)\u<ias ev j} r) "^v^r) reXet- 
 ovo-Qai apxeTai, iniTeiveiv to. eKei- 
 vtjs yvpvao-ia. 
 
 7. veu> yap 6Vre] We per- 
 ceive in Theodorus something 
 of the consciousness of the 
 contrast between youth and 
 age, which appears also in the 
 Eleate and in the Athenian 
 Stranger in the Laws. Cf. 
 Theaet. 146 b, 162 b. 
 
 9. nodev] " From some cause 
 or other," " in some respect." 
 
 10. tov pev ye — olKeioTrjTa] 
 
 There is a sort of humour in 
 the conscious technicality of 
 
 the language, (cpvo~LV — (patveadai 
 — K\r)cris — opwvvpos — Trpocrprjo-ts 
 
 — oixf toT?jra,)which also reminds 
 us that we are engaged in dia- 
 lectic. 
 
 11. opoiov epoli] Theagt. 143 e. 
 
 12. r)plv] The plural gives 
 a more courteous turn to the 
 expression. The dative, al- 
 though governed by 6pa>vvpo<; — 
 oUeioTrjTa, has something of an 
 ethical force. Cf. Soph. 216 e. 
 
 14. dm Xoyuv] " By means of 
 
The latter 
 at once re- 
 sumes the 
 leadership 
 of the dis- 
 cussion, and 
 prescribes 
 the States- 
 man rather 
 than the 
 Philoso- 
 pher for 
 the next 
 subject of 
 definition.' 
 
 The States- 
 man, also, 
 like the 
 Sophist, is 
 a man of 
 art, and the 
 arts and 
 sciences 
 must be 
 again di- 
 vided. 
 
 4 I1AAT0N02 
 
 pi&iv. QeaLTi]TU) pev ovv civtos re crvvf.p.L^a yOes p. 25 
 8id Xoycov kou vvv dia]Koa d7roKpivap.evov, ^.coKparovs 
 oe ovberepa' del 8t aKe^/aaOat kou tovtov. tfioi p.ev 
 ovv elaav0L9, <roi Se vvv diroKpLvlaOu). 
 5 HE. Tavr eo-Tcu. 'O 2to/c/3are?, aKoveis Srj 
 ^GJKpdrovs ; 
 
 NE02 20. No*. 
 
 HE. 'SvyxojpeL? ovv oty Xe'yei ; 
 
 NE. 20. Yldvv /JL€V ovv. 
 iq HE. Ov rd ad kcoXvelv (fjalveTou, Set oe 'laco? en 
 rjrrov rapid SiaKCoXveiv. dXXd drj p.erd tov o~o(f)i- b 
 crr-qv dvayKaiov, d>9 ip.o\ (palverai, tov ttoXltlkov 
 avdpa Siatr/relv vav. koli p.01 Xeye, irorepov tcov 
 
 i7TLO-T1]p.6vOJV TLV rjpUV KOU TOVTOV $€T€OV, Y) 770)? ', 
 
 15 NE. 20. Ovtcds. 
 
 HE. Tec? einaTrjiias apa StaXrjTTTeov, wcnrep rjvLKa 
 
 TOV irpOTtpOV io-K07T0VfJL€V \ 
 
 NE. 20. Tax av. 
 
 HE. Ou p.ev Sr) Kara tovtov ye, co ^coKpare^ 
 20 (f)a[veTal pot Tp.rjpa. 
 
 argument," i. e. as to their men- 
 tal qualities. Cf. Theset. 145. 
 Socrates here shews the same 
 urbanity as in the opening of 
 the Thesetetus and Sophist. 
 Compare with the structure of 
 the sentence and the introduc- 
 tion of the minor premiss with 
 Sij (Bel 8)7) Theset. 143 d : ao\ 
 drj ovk oXiyiaroi TrXrjO-id^ovat — 
 ei 8fj ovv fjbecos av ttvOol^v, 
 
 And for ye, resuming what has 
 been already said, cf. infr. 260 c, 
 deo-rro^ovrd ye. 
 
 12. tov noXiriKov] Bodl. A, pr. 
 n, ttcXltixov tov. This illustrates 
 a frequent source of corrup- 
 
 tion in MSS., the inversion of 
 the order of words. 
 
 14. The requirement that the 
 king shall be eTTLo-TTj/icov tivos, 
 the possessor of a perfect 
 science, is upheld throughout 
 the dialogue, and hence the 
 definition of the king excludes 
 all the actual rulers of existing 
 communities. The question in 
 the text is asked not without 
 ironical allusion to this " crowd 
 of satyrs and centaurs " (infr. 
 303 c), whose art, like that of 
 the Sophist, proves to be a 
 mere sham. 
 
 Ka\ tovtov] " As well as 
 
riOAITIKOS. 
 
 258. 
 
 NE. ID. TifLrjv, 
 
 £?E. Kar aAAo. 
 
 NE. 20. "Eolk6 ye. 
 
 S"E. T?)j> ow ttoXltlkt]V drpairbv 7rfj T19 avev- 
 pr/aei ; 8ei yap avrifv avevpelv, kgu x^P^ a<peXoi>Tos 5 
 airo 7W aXXcov Ibeav amy \xlav iTrKJCppayuraaOai, 
 Ka\ Tals aXXais exTpoirals ev aXXo eibos eiriarifiriva- 
 jxevovs Tracras ras i7rtaTr)fjLas cos* ovcras Svo eldj] 81a- 
 voijOrjvat tt)v ^/v\tjv i]\x r 2v woLrjaai. 
 
 NE. 212. Tour' rfSr) crop, olfiai, to epyov, a> ijei/e, 10 
 aXX ovk kjiov ylyverai. 
 
 HE. Act ye /j.r)i>, co ~2c$KpaT€9, avrb elvai /cat ar6i>, 
 orav £fjL(f)ai>€? tj/jlIv yevrjTai. 
 
 the angler (Soph. 219 a) and 
 the Sophist (lb. 221 c)." 
 
 1. Ti fxrjv] "What then]" 
 This less frequent signification 
 of tl fiTjv probably contains the 
 explanation of the general use 
 to signify assent. " What else V 
 = "surely." Cf. Parm. 139 d: 
 
 "On ovk €TT€i8av tcivtov yevrjTai 
 tco ti, £i> yiyverai. 'AAXa ti pr)v; 
 k.t.\. The&'t. 142 a : nov pr)v } 
 4. aTpair6v~\ The Stranger 
 recurs to the metaphor "which 
 he employed in Soph. 222 a. 
 This appears clearly from the 
 word eKTpo7rah, which recals e<- 
 Tpen€<r8ov (I.e.) Compare Phosdo 
 
 65b: Kivdvvevei toi iho-rrep arpenros 
 tis rjpas eK(pepeiv ev rfj aKe^ei, on 
 
 k.t.X. The art is identified with 
 the method of finding the art. 
 
 7. rais aXKais eKTpoirais — 
 
 iroirjo-ai] This is an applica- 
 tion of the lesson learnt in 
 the previous dialogue, that for 
 every positive conception there 
 is a corresponding negative 
 expression not signifying tbe 
 
 opposite, but including all that 
 is other than the positive no- 
 tion. See esp. Soph. 257 e : 
 
 aAAo ti rSiv ovtuiv tivos yevovs 
 dcpopiadeu K.a.1 Tipos ti tuiv ovtcov 
 irakiv dvTireSev ourcu ovpj3aivei 
 elvai ti to pr) kci\6v • The mind 
 is here viewed as giving her 
 impress to objects, and not as 
 receiving impressions from 
 them (contrast with this the 
 image of the waxen block in 
 the Thesetetus). Similar lan- 
 guage occurs in Phredo 75 d : 
 
 nepl aTtavTcnv uls eiTiacppayi^o- 
 peOa tuvto o eo~Tiv, Cf. also 
 
 Soph. 253 d. 
 
 8. a>s ovaas 8uo eidrj] As 
 constituting two classes or 
 kinds. 
 
 12. kci\ a6v] I.e. You must 
 make the distinction your 
 own, go through the process 
 for yourself. In his more 
 systematic dialogues Plato still 
 insists on the importance of tbe 
 learner's following every step 
 of an inquiry. 
 
 Tly wliat 
 path, then, 
 does the 
 
 - 
 
 diverge 
 from the 
 bi aten way 
 of know- 
 Led -','■ in 
 general ? 
 It is the 
 duty alike 
 of ques- 
 tioner and 
 respondent 
 to deter- 
 mine this, 
 while part- 
 ing off all 
 other by- 
 ways, and 
 
6 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 stamping 
 them with 
 a sing le 
 negative 
 
 form. 
 
 The theory 
 
 of numbers 
 
 is an ex- 
 ample of a 
 class of 
 sciences, 
 in which 
 knowledge 
 is wholly 
 separable 
 from ac- 
 tion. 
 
 Whereas in 
 carpentry 
 and other 
 handi- 
 crafts, 
 knowledge 
 is bound 
 up with 
 
 NE. 20. KaAwy tines, p. 25* 1 
 
 SE. ' Ap OVV OVK dpi0fl7]TlKrj peV KCLL TlVeS €T€p(XL 
 
 TavTr) avyyevels riyyo.i \J/lAou twv Trpdijecov eiai, to 
 8e yvwvai irapecr^ovTO povov ; 
 5 NE. 20. "Ear us OVTCOS. 
 
 aE. Ai 8e ye wepl t€ktovlkt)v av koll avpiracrav 
 ■yeipovpyiav dairep ev tolls Trpd^eaLV evovcrais avp(f)u- 
 
 TOV TYJIS eTTLaTrjprjV KeKTrjVTCLL, KOLL (TVVOLTTOTeXoVO-L tol e 
 
 yiyisopeisa vir clvtcqv aiopaTa, irporepov ovk oistol. 
 10 NE. 20. T/ firju ; 
 
 3(E. TaVTYj TOLVVV (TVpJTT 0L(T0L9 iTTLCTTrjpaS BldipU, 
 
 tt)V peis 7rpa.KTiK.rjv TrpoatLTTCDV, tyjv 8e povov yvco- 
 
 (TTLK7\V. 
 
 2. apidjirjTLKT] fJL€U — fiovov] 
 
 This in modern language is the 
 distinction between science and 
 art. Cf. Phileb. 56, 57. 
 
 3. ■tyihai rcov Trpd^eu>v\ " Dis- 
 engaged from pi-actice," i. e. 
 abstract. The same word is 
 used, infr. 299 e, to distinguish 
 " pure arithmetic" from geo- 
 metry and astronomy. apidp.7]- 
 tiktj (the theory of numbers, 
 not arithmetic in the modern 
 sense, which more nearly an- 
 swers to Xoyia-TLKrj,) is always 
 spoken of by Greek philosophers 
 as the most abstract of the ma- 
 thematical sciences. E. g. Ar. 
 
 Met. I. 2 : al e£ eXarrovcov — tcov 
 sk 7rpo(rde'(T(a>s, oxmep dpi6p.rjTiKr] 
 yeaiperplas. Again, in Theset. 
 165 a Dialectics are opposed, 
 as yf/ikol Xoyoi, " mere abstrac- 
 tion," to mathematics gene- 
 rally. 
 
 4. TTapeaxovTO ] For this 
 'poetical' use of the aorist, 
 cf. TheaBt. 156 d: iyepero — 
 7Tepuirkrj(T6rj, and note. 
 
 6. At 8e ye — KeKTrjvrai] " But 
 in the case of carpentry and 
 the sister arts, and of every 
 handicraft, the knowledge is 
 as it were merged or inherent 
 in the operations ; and they 
 assist in perfecting the struc- 
 tures which result from them." 
 Note the expression al (rexvai) 
 
 eTVLO-Trjprjv KeKTijvTai. By a fu- 
 sion of abstract and concrete 
 common in these dialogues, 
 the attributes of the artist 
 are attached to the art. Cf. 
 Phileb. 41 e: el to ^ovkt]pa — 
 j3ov\erai. 
 
 8. avv(nroTe\ovo~i\ Sc. tri/v 
 rals npd^eaiv. wr avTwv, SC Tap 
 irpa^euv. 
 
 9. yiyvopeva — tvpoTepov ovk 
 
 ovtcl\ Whereas the objects of 
 the abstract sciences are never 
 produced, but exist always. 
 
 12. tj]V peu] Sc. emo-Tr/pr)!', 
 i. e. twv eTno-TT)p.S>v ei8os. This 
 helps the transition to the 
 singular eVicT^s in what fol- 
 lows. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 259- 
 
 NE. 20. "ElTTCO (TOl TUvO* 0)9 flLOLS €TTiaT1]pr/S 
 
 rrjs oA?;y ei'5/; 8uo. 
 
 £,E. YloT€pOl> OVV TOV TToXlTLKOV KOU fiuaiXtU KOU 
 
 SeaTTOTi-jv Ka\ er olK.ovop.ov drjao/xcp go? lv iravra 
 ravra Trpoaayoptvovres, ?; Tooravra? re)(ua? auras 
 elvai (j)6)fiev, oaairep 6vop.ara eppr}0ij ; MaXXov 8e 
 
 fXOl SevpO €7T0V. 
 
 NE. so. n^ ; 
 
 £?E. Tjjde. ei tco tls twv Sr/fiocrievoPTov larpcou 
 'iKavos ijvfLJ3ovA€V€iv 18lcot6vcol> avro?, dp ovk dva- 
 yKalov avTw 7rpoaayopevea0aL rovvop.a r-qs Tiyyrjs 
 ravrou oirep q> avfi^ovXevet ; 
 
 NE. 20. W. 
 
 SE. TV 5'; oar is fiacriXevovTi \wpas dv8p\ ira- 
 
 hihJ imme 
 
 !y a-> 
 
 pro- 
 dactLon. 
 Sci( ace, 
 
 Hi. li. Lb 
 either prac 
 
 ileal or 
 
 5 theoi 
 '1'.. which 
 branch 
 does the 
 Statesman 
 belong 1 
 Or, let us 
 first ask, 
 Arc S 
 man, King, 
 
 IO Master, 
 House- 
 holder, the 
 sune or 
 difFerent in 
 respect of 
 science ? 
 One who is 
 competent 
 
 3. Horepov ovv k.t.A. ] This 
 question is closely connected 
 with the one in hand. If 
 government is an abstract 
 science, then the conditions 
 under which it is exercised 
 and the number of the persons 
 to be governed cannot alter 
 the principles of government : 
 and, conversely, if the prin- 
 ciples are thus altered, it is 
 not an abstract science. 
 
 4. Kal er oIkovojjlov ] en 
 
 marks that this is an extreme 
 step. 
 
 6i]0~opev — 7rpocrayopevovTes ] 
 The participle, although re- 
 quired to balance the clause 
 after the introduction of iravra 
 ravra, is redundant, as in e'977 
 \iya>v. 
 
 ei> TTavra ravra] Cf. Phileb. 
 
 25 d, alib. 
 
 6. MaAAov 8e poi 8evpa e7rou] 
 
 This is a natural touch. The 
 Stranger feels that the ques- 
 
 tion has been put too ab- 
 strusely for his young re- 
 spondent. 
 
 9. driiioa-ievovratv] " Practis- 
 ing physicians." The 8r)pio- 
 
 epyos is opposed to the iStcori]? 
 (01 8i]pioepyol i'a(Tiv, p-avriv r\ 
 Irjrijpa kcikcov). Cf. Al\ Pol. III. 
 6 '. 'larpos 8' ore 8r]piovpy6i Kal 
 6 dpx'.TexToviKos Kal rptros 6 ne- 
 Trai8evpevos rrepl rr\v re)(VT]v. 
 
 10. up' ovk] " Is it not in- 
 evitable that he should have 
 the same professional designa- 
 tion with the man whom he 
 
 advises 1 ?" rovvopa tJ}? T€\vtjs 
 (cogn. accus. after Trpoa-ayopev- 
 eo-8ai) is added for the sake of 
 greater precision. It appears 
 from the Gorgias, p. 455 b, 
 compared with Xen. Mem. IV. 
 2, 5, that certain public medi- 
 cal officers were appointed by 
 the ecclesia of Athens. Stall- 
 baum thinks that these are 
 meant by the Srjpoo-ievovres 
 
8 
 
 FIAAT0N02 
 
 to advise :\ 
 
 physician 
 
 deserves 
 the name of 
 Physician, 
 
 whether he 
 practises or 
 iidt. So one 
 who can 
 advise 
 a king, 
 though he 
 may hold 
 a private 
 station, is 
 a king in 
 knowledge. 
 Hence the 
 Statesman 
 is a kinar. 
 
 paivelv t)eivos lSioott]? u>v avro?, dp ov (f)r)aop.(i' e\€W ]». 9 
 avrov T)]v e7ri(TTy)fJU]v iju e'Sei rov apypvTa olvtov kck- 
 TrjaOat ; 
 
 NE. 20. $rjo-on€v. 
 
 HE. 'AAAa fxrjv rj ye aXrjOivov fiacriXeojS fiacre- h 
 Xlky) ; 
 
 NE. 20. No/. 
 
 SE. Tavrrju 8e 6 KeKTTjp,evo9 ovk, av re ap^cou av 
 T idicoTrjs a>v rvyyavrj, iravrois Kara ye rrjv re^y-qv 
 avrrjv $o.(Jl\lkos 6p6(os Trpoap-qO-qaeTai ; 
 
 NE. 20. AiKaiov yovv. 
 
 iHE. Kai jirju oiKovofxos ye kou becnroriqs tolvtov* 
 
 NE. 20. Ti firju ; 
 
 HE. Ti 5e ; pieydXrjs a^qp-a OLKrjcrem r/ crfiLKpas 
 av 7roXeco? bynos p-cov ti 737)09 apyrjv hiolaerov \ 
 
 larpol, but it seems more 
 probable that the distinction 
 meant here and in Gorg. 514 
 d is simply that between one 
 who practises and one who 
 does not practise as a phy- 
 sician — the professional and 
 the amateur. This is quite 
 sufficient for the requirements 
 of the argument. For the form 
 of expression, cf. Gorg. 474 c : 
 
 Ti fie 8rj a'ia^iov ; ttotsoov k.t.A. 
 5. >7 y e ~] >3c. eiTKTrrjfir]. 
 
 8. TavTTjP fie 6 KeKTT/^eVoy] 
 
 Note the emphatic position of 
 
 TaVTTJV. 
 
 9. Tvyxdvrj is emphatic : 
 " Whether it be his fortune to 
 i"ule or to enjoy a private sta- 
 tion." 
 
 Kara, ye ttjv rk\vr]v avrr\v\ 
 
 Compare the distinction in 
 Republic B. I, between the 
 ruler so-called, and the essen- 
 tial ruler: esp. 1, 345 c. 
 
 10. /3ao-i>.iKo'f] "Fit for so- 
 vereignty," whether actually 
 sovereign or not. 
 
 14. peyakrjs Bioicrerop] The 
 
 Politics of Aristotle (I. 1.) open 
 with a criticism of this saying, 
 in which it may be observed 
 that tbe limitation expressed 
 in the words irpbs dpxrjv is. 
 overlooked. The difference of 
 view, however, is real and 
 characteristic. As in defining 
 the Good in the Eepublic,- 
 Plato refers all to a single 
 principle, while Aristotle holds 
 that the idea of Good is dif- 
 erent in different things ; so 
 in the present case, while Plato 
 asserts that the idea of Go- 
 vernment must be the same 
 in the case of a house and 
 a city, Aristotle contends that 
 a house is essentially different 
 from a city, because composed 
 of different elements (the in- 
 
 
nOAITIKGS. 
 
 9 
 
 259- NE. 20. OvSe'v. 
 
 c aE. Ovkovv, o vvv 8r) 8ieaKoirovp.eda, (fxzvepov uj? 
 eiricrTypi] p.la ire pi iravr earl ravra. ravrijv 8e elre 
 (3acri,\iKi]v elre ttoXltlki]v elre oiKovopiKTjV tis ovo- 
 pioc^ei, p,r]8ev avrcp 8ia<fiepu>p.e6a. 5 
 
 NE. 20. Tiydp ; 
 
 fiE. AAAa p.rjv ro8e ye 8i]Xov, coy (3acriXevs airas 
 X e P (TL KaL ^vpLiravTL rco cra>p.aTi apLiKp arret, els to 
 Kare^etv ttjv ap^rju Bvvarai irpo? tt]v ttjs ^XV f 
 avveaiv kcu pcopirjv. io 
 
 NE. 20. Ai}Xov. 
 
 SE. Trj? 8rj yvuxTTiKris paXkov y rrjs yeipoTexyL- 
 kyjs kcu oXco? irpaKTLKrjs fiovXei tov fiaaiXea (j)cop.ev 
 d oiKeiorepov eivai ; 
 
 dividual being the unit of the 
 family, and the family of the 
 state), and hence the science of 
 the management of each must 
 be different also. They may 
 be compared analogically, but 
 must be carefully distinguished. 
 The point is illustrative of the 
 difference between the Plato- 
 nic and the Aristotelian ova-la, 
 — the former tending towards 
 an abstract unity, the latter 
 towards concrete definiteness 
 and reality. Cf. Ar. Pol. III. 
 9. The Platonic view had a 
 germ in Socrates. See Xen. 
 Mem. III. 4, 12 : fj yap tg>v 
 
 18icov emp.e'Xeia TrXrjdei povov 8ia- 
 
 (pepei ry~js rdv koivcov. Cf. Legg. 
 
 3, 68l : plav oIkiov koIvtjv Kal 
 
 peyaXrjv dnoTeXovvres. lb. 1,626 
 
 c, 690 a; [Erast. 138 c ;] Meno 
 73 a ; Rep. 9, 578 d. 
 
 (14.) o-x'JP-d, The word sug- 
 gests the imposing appearance 
 of a stately mansion. Cf. 
 
 Eurip. Ale. 911 (of the palace 
 of Admetus) : <S ayjipa 86pav, 
 7T(os elae'Xdco ; 
 
 (ig.) noXems oyKos] So, with 
 a different shade of meaning, 
 Eep. 2, 373 b: (17 ttoXis) oyKov 
 epTrXrjarea koi ttXt]8ovs. 
 
 2. 6 vvv drj SieaKOTTovjieda] 
 
 df} is omitted in one MS., Ven. 
 2, and Si in another, Par. F. 
 
 6. Tt ydp ;] " Why should 
 wet" 
 
 7. as fiaatXevs anas] Cf. 
 Ar. Pol. VII. 3 : ravri-jv be ttjv 
 irep\ rdvayKala Xeyopeva noielv 
 e7rlo~Tuo~dai tov ap-^ovra ovk dv- 
 ayxalov, dXXa xpr)o~dai paXXov' 
 Barepov be Kal dvbpa7robcbbes. 
 
 I 2. paXXov — otKetdrepoi'] Cf. 
 Pep. I, 331 c: ev dvff evos ovk 
 iXd\(Larov e-ywye delr/v av els 
 tovto ttXovtov )(pr]o~ip.G>TdTT)v elvat 
 
 — where the measure of compa- 
 rison is at some distance from 
 the adjective, as here. 
 
 And he 
 
 bouse v.. II 
 haa tlio 
 HruiK- art of 
 govern- 
 ment which 
 
 man has. 
 Therefore 
 
 these forms 
 of art or 
 science 
 differ only 
 in name. 
 And it is 
 clour, at all 
 events, that 
 the royal 
 function is 
 a work of 
 mind. 
 Kingcraft, 
 or State- 
 craft, then, 
 is a theo- 
 retical 
 science. 
 
10 
 
 FIAATON02 
 
 Now 
 
 theoretical 
 science is 
 not one 
 entire and 
 perfect 
 chrysolite, 
 but divides 
 into Criti- 
 cal and 
 Command- 
 ing. 
 
 NE. 20. 17 pr)v ; P- 259 
 
 SE. Tr)v apa ttoXltlki]v koll ttoXltlkov kou fiacri- 
 
 XiK)]V KOLL fioXTlXlKOV €LS TOLVTQV 0)9 tV TTO.VTa TLXVTa 
 
 5 NE. HO. AtjXov. 
 
 HE. Ovkovv TTopevoineO* av eijr/9, d fierce Tama 
 ttjv yvcocrrLKrjv SiopL^olfJieda ; 
 
 NE. 20. Udvv ye. 
 
 HE. Yipoae^e 8rj tov vovv, av apa iv amy} two. 
 10 8ia(fivr)v Karavo/jacofiev. 
 
 NE. 20. <S?pa(e iroiav. 
 
 HE. ToidvSe. XoyuiTLKr) ttov tls r]puv tjv riyyr\. e 
 
 NE. 20. No*. 
 
 HE. Tcov yvcoaTiKcov ye, olfiai, TravTairacn re- 
 \syymv. 
 
 2. Tjji' apa — ^vv6r](rofiev\ Be- 
 cause kingcraft depends en- 
 tirely on knowledge (supra 
 
 C, aKka firjv pap-qi/), and, 
 
 in point of the knowledge 
 required, these arts have been 
 shewn to be the same, supi^a 
 a, b. There is a slight inex- 
 actness in iravra ravra being 
 used for two things (n-oXi- 
 tikt) and j3ao-tXtK)y). This is 
 perhaps due to the same 
 phrase having occurred above, 
 where more than two arts 
 were enumerated, p. 258 e. 
 
 10. Siacpvrjv] " Any natural 
 parting or cleft." The word 
 is used literally in Phaedo 98 c 
 for the ligaments between the 
 bones of the human body : to. 
 
 ocrra e'xei 8ia(pvas X W P' ? an ' o-Wtj- 
 
 \av. Every conceivable image 
 is employed to express the 
 "lines and veins" of nature, 
 which are the ground of true 
 
 logical distinctions. Cf. Soph. 
 229 b, ropfjv: ib. 268 e, 8t- 
 ttXotjv. The present image cor- 
 responds with the language of 
 Phsedr. 265 e: repveiv — kut 
 
 apdpa k. r. X. See also ibid. 
 
 268 a : el Ka\ aol (paiverai 8ie- 
 o~ttjk6s aiiTav to rjTpiov, axnrep 
 
 epoi Most MSS. have 81a- 
 
 Cpvyrjv. 
 
 12. rju] The past tense 
 implies no reference to any 
 former passage, but is only 
 the common form of allu- 
 sion to a familiar fact. Xo- 
 yio-TiKr) is instanced instead of 
 dpidprjTiKT] for the sake of va- 
 riety. The distinction here 
 introduced by Plato is applied 
 in Ar. Eth. VI. 10, § 2, where 
 wisdom is distinguished from 
 intelligence : fj pev yap (pp6- 
 vrjais eTTiTaKTiKr] iariv, rj §e avv- 
 iaiS KptTlKT) povov. 
 
riOAITIKOS. 
 
 11 
 
 259- NE. 20. Tim <$' ov; 
 
 3?E. rVoucrx; 8e XoyiaTLKrj ttjv ev tols dpiOfioL? 
 8ia(j)opou> fitJov tl irXeov epyov 8cocrofjL€i> r) to. yvu>- 
 aOevra Kplvai ; 
 
 NE. 20. 17 fir)V ; 
 
 SE. Kat yap dpyiTeKT<£>v ye was ouk olvto? epya- 
 tlko9, dXXd £pya.TU)V apyu>v. 
 
 NE. 20. Nat. 
 
 3?E. JJape-^ofievos ye wov yvwaiv, dXX ov %€i- 
 povpyiav. 
 
 NE. 20. Ovrm. 
 2,6o. ££E. Aikolico? Srj fiereyeiv av XeyoiTO ttj? yvcDcm- 
 kt]$ e7rio~Tr}firjs. 
 
 NE. 20. Udvv ye. 
 
 SE. Tovtco Se ye, oI/jlcu, irpoarjKeL Kpivavri /jltj 
 reXos ^X av I* 7 ! *' aTrrjXXdyOai, KaOdirep 6 XoyicrTrj? 
 diryjXXaKTO, irpoo-TaTTeiv Se eKaaroLS twv epyarow 
 to ye irpoatyopov, ems av direpydo-^vTai to irpo- 
 GTayOev. 
 
 Arith- 
 metic, for 
 instanci . i ; 
 
 purely cri- 
 tical : the 
 Master 
 Builder, on 
 the other 
 hand, while 
 his busi- 
 ness is 
 theory and 
 not prac- 
 tice, must 
 superin- 
 tend the 
 1 application 
 of his 
 theory. 
 
 2. Tpoicrt) Se 'KoyiariKfiJ " But 
 when arithmetic has discerned 
 the differences amongst num- 
 bers, shall we give her any 
 further office than to judge of 
 that which she has discerned?" 
 Ans. "How should we?" (ri 
 
 6. Kal yap apxireKToiv ye ttRs 
 
 k.t.A.] ri fx-fjv expresses surprise 
 that the question should have 
 been asked. An example which 
 justifies the question is, there- 
 fore, introduced with yap. 
 " I asked because there are 
 branches of theoretical know- 
 ledge which do not end in 
 theory." There may seem at 
 first sight to be a confusion in 
 
 classing the master-carpenter 
 under yvaxmicrj, when carpen- 
 try has been placed amongst 
 the practical sciences. But 
 this helps to shew that the 
 " commanding sciences," al- 
 though independent of prac- 
 tice, yet have an immediate 
 relation to the practical. 
 
 1 8. to ye Trp6o-(popov\ He is 
 not wholly engaged in directing 
 his workmen, nor does he im- 
 part all his knowledge to each 
 of them, but he must direct 
 each in so far as is required 
 for the particular work ap- 
 pointed them. This limitation 
 is expressed by ye. 
 
 C 2 
 
12 
 
 FIAAT0N02 
 
 This dis- 
 tinction 
 being ad- 
 mitted, it 
 is easy to 
 see that 
 the King 
 is not a 
 mere spec- 
 tator of the 
 life of the 
 city, but 
 that his 
 science, 
 while theo- 
 retical, is 
 also com- 
 manding^ 
 
 NE. 20. 'OpOm. p- 26 
 
 HE. Qvkovv yvGXTTLKol ptv dl re toiolvtcu tjvp- 
 TracraL kcu biroaai '^vveirovTai ttj Xoyio-TiKr}, Kplaet 
 8e Kai imraijei Siafpeperov aXXijkoLv rovrco too b 
 5 yevee ; 
 
 NE. 20. <balv€cr6ov. 
 
 HE. ' Ap ovv (TvpTraon]? tyjs yvooaTiKr}? el to p.ev 
 
 eTTLTOLKTlKOV /JL€pO?, TO 8e KptTLKOV StaipOVpeVOL 7T/30- 
 
 aei7rotpeu, eppeAu)? av (palpev diyprjadou ; 
 10 NE. 20. Kara ye ttjv eprjv 86^av. 
 
 HE. 'AAAa prjv tols ye kolvt} tl TrpaTTOvaiv aya- 
 tttjtov bpovoelv. 
 
 NE. 20. YimS ou; 
 
 HE. Tovtov tq'lvvv p.expt7rep av avrol Kotvco- 
 15 vcopev^ eareov to. ye tcov olWcdv So^acrpaTa 
 Xalpeiu. 
 
 NE. SO. Ti firjv ; 
 
 HE. <&epe Srj, TOVTaiv toIv Teyyaiv rjpuv tov /3a- c 
 o-ikiKov iv iroTepa QeTeov ; ap ev Tjj KpiTiKrj, KaOd- 
 
 5. ye'vee] The open form 
 is probably retained to distin- 
 guish the dual from the plural 
 yivrj. 
 
 7. to fj,ev eniTaKTiKov pepos, 
 to 8e KpiTucov] Ar. Pol. IV. 1 2 : 
 Makio-Ta Se, ws cnrXcos elTveiv, 
 dpxas XeKTeov ravras, oaois cmo- 
 oVoorai ftovXevo-aadai re 7repl ti- 
 va>v Kai Kplvai Ka\ eTTiTatjat.' Ka\ 
 p.akio-Ta tovto, to yap emraTTfiv 
 apxiKaTepov io~Tiv. lb. VII. 5 : 
 apXOVTOs 6° eVtVn|i? Ka\ Kpio-is 
 ecrrtV. 
 
 1 1 . 'AAAa p.i)v — j^aipeiv] The 
 
 maxim is appropriately bor- 
 rowed from political science 
 (for opovoia is noXiTiKr/ (piXia) 
 
 in order to assert the indepen- 
 dence of the dialectical reason. 
 The same thing is meant as in 
 Gorgias 472 b ; Protag. 331 c, 
 348 a. 
 
 19. Kadcmep Tiva BeaTrjv] Plato 
 recurs to the image of the 
 theatre, which he employed in 
 Thepet. 173 C : oibe 6eaTi)s, &o~- 
 Trep iroirjTals. 
 
 The notion of iiriTOKTiKr] 
 may be compared with Kant's 
 imperative of the reason : an 
 ideal which has immediate re- 
 ference to life. In Socrates, 
 philosophy becomes practical 
 without losing anything of the 
 speculative impulse. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 13 
 
 260. 7rep Tiva 6eari']v ; ?) pdXXov Trjs eTriTaKTiKrj? o>9 ovra 
 avrov T€)(V7]? O/jcropev, SeaTro^ovrd ye ; 
 
 NE. 20. riwy yap ov p.dXXov ; 
 
 HE. T?}^ eirLTaKTiKi-jV 81) reyyi]v ttolXlv dv elrj 
 
 Oeareov el ttt) bieo-rrjKe. Kai fioi SoKei rfjSe Try, Ka6d- 
 
 irep rj tcov Kair-qXtov reyyr\ tyjs tcov avT07TtoXcov 8lco- 
 
 d picrTai ri)(yrj9, koll to fiaaiXiKov yevos eoiKev diro 
 
 tov tcov KijpvKcov yevovs a(pa>pio-0ai. 
 
 NE, 20. nc5y ; 
 
 SE. YlcoXrjde'vra ttov irporepov epya dXXorpta 
 TrapaSe\6pevoL SevTepov ttcoXovctl ttoXlv o'l KairrjXoL- 
 
 NE. 20. Yiavv pep ovv. 
 
 AE. Ovkovv koll to KTjpvKLKov <j)v\ov eTTurayQevT 
 aXXorpca vo-qpara irapafteyopevov avrb SevTepov eiri- 
 TaTTei ttolXlv erepois. 
 
 NE. 20. 'AXr)0eo-TaTa. 
 
 SE. TV ovv ; els ravrov pi^opev (3ao-iXiKr)v eppr]- 
 e vevTLKjj, KeXevoTTiKr}, ptavTiKrj, KrjpVKLKjj koll ttoXXoas 
 
 10 But com- 
 manding 
 science is 
 distin- 
 guished 
 into origi- 
 nal and 
 derived, 
 much as 
 the inanu- 
 
 *5 facturer 
 is distin- 
 guished 
 from the re- 
 tail dealer. 
 This sepa- 
 rates the 
 
 2. cW7ro£bi/ra ye] As the 
 
 word ruler implies. Cf. Soph. 
 221 d : cos navrbs del tolovtov 
 eivai to y e ovopa tovto s^ccv. 
 
 5. rfjde 7177] Sc. 8ietTTr]Kevai, 
 The clause KaBcmep — ucpcopladai 
 
 is in apposition with (or ex- 
 plains) TySe irrj SieaTTjuevai, and 
 the notion of 8oKel is resumed 
 
 in eoiKev. 
 
 6. avTOTTcoXcov] 9 MSS. have 
 
 avTomoXcov. 
 
 13. Ovkovv — ire pots'] The 
 change from imTax&ev TaWorpia 
 to eTnraxdevr dWorpia is SO 
 slight and so necessary as 
 hardly to deserve notice were 
 not the former received by 
 Bekker and defended by Stall- 
 
 bauni. The plural e/rtrax&Wa 
 and the absence of the article 
 are both required by the paral- 
 lelism to irccikrjdeura dWorpia 
 
 in the previous sentence, avrol 
 is not pleonastic but emphatic. 
 " The heralds themselves give 
 orders in their turn." 
 
 17. irigopev] Boell. An. F. 
 Bekk. Tut. pi^copev. The other 
 MSS. and edd. have plgopev. 
 The point can hardly be deter- 
 mined, and the change either 
 way is extremely slight. With 
 Stallbaum, I am inclined to 
 prefer plgopev, as more dis- 
 tinctly pointing to a negative 
 ansAver. 
 
14 
 
 riAATONOS 
 
 king from 
 the herald, 
 the inter- 
 preter, the 
 prophet, 
 and others 
 whose duty 
 it may 
 often be to 
 issue com- 
 mands. 
 
 erepais rovTCdv T€)(i>cu? avyyeveaiv, at avfiTracrai to p. 26c 
 y tiuTOLTTeiv eypvcriv ; 7) (3ovAei, KaOairep elKa^ppev 
 vvv 8rj, kou Tovvopa irapeiKao-wpev, eireibi^ koll cr^eShv 
 avcavvpov ov Tvyyavei to twv avTeirvraKToiv yevos, 
 
 5 kou TavTYf Tama SteXcopeda, to p.ev tcov fiao-iXecov 
 yevos els ti]v avTeirtTaKTLKrjv OevTes, tov 8e aXXov 
 iravTos apeArjaavTes, ovojicl erepov avTols irapayo>- 
 prjcravTes OecrOai two. ; tov yap apyovTos eveica rjpuv 
 7} jjl€0o8o? rjv, aXX ov^l tov evavTiov. p. 26 
 
 10 NE. 20. Yldvv ptev ovv. 
 
 aE. Ovkovv erreidr] tovto p.eTpiw9 atyeaTrjKev our 
 eKeivcov, aXkoTpLOTTjTi Stopio-Oeu irpbs oiKeiOTrjTa, 
 tovto avTO iraXiv av SiaLpelu avayKalov, el Tiva 
 TOpLrjV eri eyppev vireUovaav ev tovtco ; 
 
 15 NE. 20. Uoipv ye. 
 
 1. tovtcov re)(yais cvyyeveaiv\ 
 The order is Texvais avyyeveaiv 
 
 tovtcov. Many other instances 
 of inversion might have heen 
 noticed. 
 
 to y' itiiTaTTeiv ] I. e. hy 
 whatever further characteristic 
 they may be distinguished. 
 
 2. tcaBdrrep eiKa^opev — napei- 
 
 Kao-afiev] " Shall we form the 
 name analogically, in accordance 
 Avith the comparison which we 
 made just now" — viz. between 
 the king and the avT07ra>\r]s 1 
 
 7. iTepov — Tiva] Lit. " Step- 
 ping aside for some other to 
 give them a name." The ac- 
 cusative before 6eo-6ai is pre- 
 ferred to the dative after 
 
 7rapax<i>pr]0-avTe<; to avoid the 
 
 collision of two datives (eVepw 
 avrols). There is a slight irony 
 in Trapaxcoprjo-avTes, " yielding 
 the merit to another." Cf. 
 Soph. 267 b, Prot. 336 c. 
 
 II. Ovkovv oIk(i6t^to\ Since 
 
 then this kind has been dis- 
 tinguished from the rest with 
 tolerable clearness, being de- 
 fined by contrasting what 
 comes from others with that 
 which originates with oneself. 
 
 1 3. el] Either " to divide, 
 if we can find a line of sec- 
 tion : " or, perhaps better, " to 
 divide, and see whether we can 
 find a line of section." 
 
 Tiva roprjv — exopev ] This 
 
 phraseology reappears in Legg. 
 
 II, 944 b: exei Tiva TOfiriv 77 
 Tovrav tcov ovopdrav emcpopd. 
 
 14. Top.r]v] Cf. supr. p. 259 
 d, 8ia(pvrjv, and note. 
 
 v7reUovo-av] " Yielding" to 
 the sharp instrument of di- 
 vision, the " dividing edge" 
 of thought. Cf. Tim. 62 b: 
 
 o-Kkrjpd SV, oaois oz> rjpS>v fj (rapt- 
 vire'iKt), 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 15 
 
 261. £?E. Kal fju)v i\>aivope6a €\€IV «AA' eiraKoXovOcov 
 crvvrepve. 
 
 NE. 20. Ufi ; 
 
 SE. Hco/ray biroaovs av upypvTas 8Lavoi]0wp.ev 
 eiriTa^ei Trpoor\pu>pevov9, dp ov\ evpr)aop.ev yevecrem 
 b twos eveKa TrpoaraTTOvras ; 
 NE. 20. Wmh' ov; 
 
 SE. Kal prjv ra ye ytyvopeva iravra hlya Sia- 
 Aa/3e«> ov iravrdirao-L yaXeirov. 
 
 NE. 20. ufj ; 
 
 £?E. Ta /^ey a\j/v)(a avrcoi/ earl ttov ^vpiravTcov, 
 ra S' epy^vya. 
 
 NE. SO. Nat. 
 
 AE. TouVoiS 1 oV ye avTols to tov yvcocrTiKov pepos 
 eiriraKTiKov ov, e'iirep fiov\6pe6a Tepveiv, repovp.ev. 
 
 NE. 20. Kararl; 
 
 SE. To p}v eVi tous* tcdv d^v^cov yeveo~ecriv av" 
 c tov Tacro-ovTes, to <5' eVi Tats twv ep^v^wv. Kal irav 
 ovtcos rfSrj diaiprjaeTaL 6Yx«« 
 
 NE. 20. YlavTaTrao-L ye. 
 
 3E. To p.ev To'ivvv avTcou TrapaX'nrwpev, to <5' 
 avaAa(3copLei>, avaXafiovTes 8e p,epLO~cope0a els 8vo to 
 avpirav. 
 
 There Is a 
 
 further dis- 
 tinction. 
 
 All com- 
 mands is- 
 5 8ue<l by a 
 sovereign 
 
 intend the 
 doing or 
 making of 
 somotliiiiLf. 
 
 Now the 
 objects of 
 all produc- 
 tion, and 
 therefore of 
 works com- 
 manded, 
 are inani- 
 5 mate, like 
 those of 
 the master 
 builder, or 
 animate, 
 as are the 
 subjects of 
 the king. 
 
 I. e7rciKo\ovda>v crvvrefive ] 
 
 " Follow and divide with me." 
 Cf. Soph. 228 c. 
 
 5. yeveaeas tlvos evena] "For 
 
 the sake of some production." 
 The word yeveo-is in Plato's 
 later dialogues acquires a wide 
 generality of meaning. Com- 
 pare the following passages : 
 Soph. 235 e ; Polit. 282 d, 
 283 d, 284 c j Phileb. 26 d, 
 27 a; Tim. 29 d ; Legg. 10, 
 889 a, 892 c, 11, 920 e. 
 
 14. Tovtois — avrols] Sc. tw 
 d\l/vxcj> re ku\ e/x^v^cp. Cf. SUpr. 
 260a: Kpiaei — Kal intranet, ilifr. 
 264 e : ra TVT-qva re Kai 7re£cp. 
 
 17. To fiiv — avrov] " The one 
 segment of it" (tov ttjs yva- 
 
 CTTIKTJS fJLtpOVS (TTlTaKTlKOV). 
 
 18, Tah t5>v i/jL^uxoov] be. ye- 
 
 vio-eo-L. " The pi-ocesses which 
 affect living creatures." 
 
 22. to o-vp.Trav] Epexegetic 
 in apposition with to 6V. 
 
16 
 
 riAATONOS 
 
 But the 
 production 
 and nur- 
 ture of ani- 
 mals may- 
 be cared 
 for either 
 singly or 
 in herds. 
 The States- 
 man is not 
 a groom, 
 hut a herds- 
 man. And 
 whether we 
 give to this 
 latter 
 branch of 
 animal- 
 tending 
 the name 
 of herding, 
 or of feed- 
 ing in 
 flocks, it 
 matters 
 little. 
 Word- 
 catching 
 is not the 
 way to get 
 rich in 
 thoughts. 
 
 NE. 20. \eyeis 5' avroiv dvaXt-pvTeov elvai iro- 
 Ttpov ; 
 
 SE. UdvTcos' 7rov to 7repl to. £o3a limaKTiKov. 
 ov yap 8r) to ye tyjs fiaaLXiKr)s e7ncrTr)p.r)s Icttl ttotz 
 
 5 Ttt)V d\j/U)(COV llTLCTTaTOVV^ 0L0V dp)(LTeKTOVLKOV, dXXa 
 
 yevvaioTepov, ev toIs ^coois" kou Trepl amd Tama ttjv 
 Svvapiv del KeKTr/pevov. 
 
 NE. 20. 'Op0m. 
 
 3?E. Ttjv ye p.r)v tcov tjcooov yeveoriv K.a\ Tpo(f)r)v 
 iott)i> p.ev tls av t8ot p,ovoTpo<plav ovcrav, ttjv he kolvtjv 
 tcov ev toLs dyeXais OpeptpLaToov eiripieXeLav. 
 
 NE. 20. 'Op0m. 
 
 SE. 'AAA' ov p.r)v tov ye ttoXltlkov evpr)aop.ev 
 idioTp6<pov, cocnrep (3orjXaTr)v rj Tiva 'nnroK.6p.ov, aAA' 
 is linrotyopficp re /ecu (3ov(f)op/3cp ptaXXov irpocreoiKOTa. 
 
 NE. 20. QaiveTal ye 8r) pr)8ev vvv. 
 
 HE. WoTepOV OVV TYjS {(0OTpO(f)LaS TTJV TCOV £vp.- 
 
 ttoXXcov kolvtjv Tpofyrjv dyeXatoTpofpiav r) KOivoTpofpi- 
 K-qv Tiva 6vop.dtfiL>pev ; 
 20 NE. 20. 'OiroTepov av ev tco Xoyco avp.^aivrj. 
 SE. KaAaiy ye, co 2w/cpa7-es" kolv 8ia(f)vXdtjr)s to 
 p.rj airovhd^eLv erri toIs ovoptaaL, irXovcrLcoTepos eis to 
 
 p. 2f 
 
 g. yeveaiv Ka\ Tpocprjv] The 
 
 ambiguity of the word yeveais 
 helps to conceal the error of 
 confusing the king with the 
 shepherd, which affords so 
 much matter for discussion in 
 what follows. 
 
 14. ^orjkarrjv] One who drives 
 an ox : as, for instance, in 
 ploughing. 
 
 1 6. Qaiverai — prjdev vvv] Cf. 
 Soph. 226 d : S^eSoi/ ovTOi vvv 
 AeX<9ee (paiverai, Rep. 7, 525 d, 
 
 iwoa p7]6evros k.t.A., and com- 
 
 pare the Homeric pe^dev Be re 
 VTjTTLOi e'yvio. 
 
 2 1. to p.fj aivovha^eiv in\ rols 
 ovofiaai ] Plato frequently 
 dwells on the danger of being 
 imposed on in philosophy by 
 words ; and alludes to the viti- 
 ating effect which a love of ver- 
 bal distinction had on his con- 
 temporaries. Cf. e. g. Thetet. 
 166 b, 177 e, 184 c ; Soph. 
 218 c ; Rep. 5, 454 a. 
 
 2 2. 7r\ovaia>Tepos (Is to yrjpas] 
 
 Unlike the 6^np.a6a.s of Soph. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 17 
 
 261. yrjpas dva([)aviio~ei ijypovrjaeco^. vvv 8e tovto pev, 
 Ka.6a.7rcp 8iai<eA.evei, iroirjTeov ti]v 8e dyeAaioTpo(j)i- 
 Ki]v ap y evvoels Trfj tl? 8l8vpov 6t7ro0?/f«y to ^r/Tovpe- 
 
 262. vov ev dLTrXacrLOLcri ra vvv ev tols rjpureaiv ety Tore 
 7Ton]aeL (jyrtiaOai ; 
 
 NE. 20. UpoOvpr/cropai. Kal /jlol 8oKel tcov p.ev 
 dvOpooiroov erepa ti? eivai, tcov 8e av Oijplcov dAArj 
 rpo(f)i]. 
 
 ■HE. YlavTairacri ye irpoOvpoTara kol avSpeioTara 
 Strjpi-jo-aL. pi] pevToi tovto ye elaavOis koto, dvvapiv 
 7Tcio~)(copev. 
 
 NE. m To wohv; 
 
 SE. M?) apiKpbv popiov ev 77750? peyaXa koI 
 
 h TToXAa d^aipcopev, pi]8e e'lSovs \copk' aAAa to p.e- 
 
 pos dp,a el8o? eyeTco. kolWiottov p.ev yap dirb tcov 
 
 d/XAcov evOvs Sia^copl^eiv to Q]Tovpevov, av opOco? 
 
 Bhall 
 
 ili\ id 
 herd 1 
 art? Shall 
 we 
 once that 
 
 III.!' 
 
 5 kind that 
 deals with 
 
 men, and 
 
 another 
 
 with 
 
 brutes ? 
 This is to 
 assume- boo 
 much. For 
 what is the 
 
 10 ground of 
 our distinc- 
 tion be- 
 tween men 
 and brutes? 
 We must 
 proceed 
 more gra- 
 dually : 
 
 j - dividing 
 each kind 
 as nearly 
 
 251 b, who are perhaps thought 
 of here. Cf. Phsedr. sub. fin. : 
 
 TrXovaiov 8e vopi£oip.i tov <ro(p6v. 
 
 2. ayeAa£orpo(/HK?}i>] He again 
 varies the word in accordance 
 with the preceding remark. 
 " Do you perceive a way in 
 which, by shewing the art of 
 herding to be twofold, one 
 may cause what is now sought 
 amongst twice the number of 
 things to be then sought 
 amongst half that number?" 
 rcls rip. the half, i. e. of the 
 double number. 
 
 4. Si7rAao-toi(n] So H. Most 
 MSS. have Sm'kao-iot.s ?/'(Bodl.i7). 
 
 The Ionic form of the dative 
 plural (which occurs again infr. 
 304 e) is one of the many co- 
 incidences in point of language 
 between this dialogue and the 
 Laws. 
 
 14. to pepos ajia eiSos e'^fVco] 
 
 The spirit of this passage may 
 be compared with Phsedr. 265 
 
 e: kclt e'i8r] repveiv, — Ka\ pr] eVi- 
 Xeipelv Karayvvvai jxepos p.rj8ev : 
 
 Phileb. 14 e : tu peXij re km 
 
 ap.a p-epr) die\a>v rw Ao'yw. Pep. 
 4, 445 d : oo-oi — iroKiTeimv rpo- 
 7rot €lo~\v e'i8rj e'xovres. The true 
 
 dialectician is he who hits 
 upon the real divisions of 
 things : and the real divisions 
 are those which a true dialec- 
 tician would make. It is diffi- 
 cult to say in how far the 
 " form" here spoken of is ob- 
 jective, and how far subjective. 
 As we should say, "do not 
 divide without a principle of 
 division." 
 
 16. av 6p8a)s e'xn] "If your 
 division proves to be the right 
 one." Young Socrates is allowed 
 
IS 
 
 nAATQNOS 
 
 as we ''.-in 
 in half, and 
 making 
 sure that 
 we can 
 assign a 
 rational 
 principle 
 for each 
 distinction. 
 
 Thus 
 our coun- 
 t^nien 
 make a 
 great as- 
 sumption 
 when they 
 
 t)(r), KaOairep oXiyov av npOTepov ob]0et? ^X eiv T ^ v P* 2< ^ 2 
 Siaipeaiv iTricnrtvaas tov Xoyov, iocov eV dv0pa>7rovs 
 wopevoptevov. dXXa yap, co (fiiXe, XeirTovpyelv ovk 
 aarcjiaXes, did pieacov oe dcr(f)aXeaT€pov levai Tepivov- 
 5Tcts, kou pdXXov iSe'ai? av ti? irpo(JTvy\dvoi. tovto 
 oe Sia(f)e'peL to irdv irpos ras (r)Tr/<T€i?. c 
 
 NE. 212. n<M?, (6 £eW, Xeyeis tovto ; 
 
 HE. YleipaTeov en aa(peaTepov (Ppd^eiv evvola 
 
 tyjs ar}9 (pvaeoos, co Sw/c/oarey. ev tco pev ovv irape- 
 
 locrTrjKOTi to. vvv Sr]Xcoaai p.r)8ev evdem dhvvaTOV 
 
 e7ri\eipr)Teov oe tl kgu apuKpcp 7rXeov avTO irpoayayelv 
 
 eh to irpocrOev cracprjveia? eveKa. 
 
 NE. 20. Iloiov ovv 8rj (ppd^ei? 8iaipovp.evov? 
 rjp.5.9 ovk 6p$a>? dpTi Spav ; 
 
 to fall into a natural error, 
 for the sake of illustrating the 
 difference between the right 
 and the wrong method. 
 
 1. Kaddnep — e\eiv\ Sc. opQcos. 
 
 2. eneaneva-as — Tropevopc-vov] 
 
 " You hastened the steps of the 
 inquiry when you saw them 
 directed towards mankind." 
 "The Argument" is still per- 
 sonified. 
 
 iireo~ntvo~as tov \6yov] Cf. 
 
 Leo-a. 2, 6*8 a: 
 
 fir) Taxy to 
 
 toiovtov Kpivapeda, dWa Biai- 
 povvTes kcito. peprj aKoncopeda, 
 
 3. Xe7rrovpyeTi/] " To make 
 short work." "To cut off too 
 small a piece." 
 
 5. tovto 8e 8ia(pepei to 7raid, 
 
 Here, as in the latter part of 
 the Phfedrus, the Idea is the 
 true form, not separated from 
 the matter, but discerned by 
 dialectic amongst particulars : 
 the objective element in each 
 determination of thought. 
 
 8, etvvia Trjs o~rjs (pvaecos, w 
 
 2a> K pa.Tes] Cf. The^t. 1 85 ; 
 
 Soph. 266 ; Parm. 130 : where 
 the capacity of the hearer is 
 likewise made the measure of 
 the enunciation of some great 
 truth. In Rep. 7, 529 e, on 
 the contrary, "dear Glaucon" 
 is not thought capable of fol- 
 lowing the most abstract ac- 
 count of dialectic. In the 
 present passage also Plato 
 breaks off abruptly : " It is 
 impossible to explain it per- 
 fectly at this present juncture." 
 
 ev tco 7rapeo-TrjKOTi to. vvv. Per- 
 haps all such discussions were 
 reserved for the "Philosophus ;" 
 and this may be one reason 
 why that dialogue was never 
 written. 
 
 1 1 . Trpoayaye'iv] Cf. Al\ Pol. 
 III. 7 : KaXas 8' e%ei Kai vvv 
 avaXaftovTas avTa npoayayelv. 
 
 13. Holov] Governed by ovk 
 opBca — Spav, " What mistake 
 do you say we have just made 
 in our divisions V 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 19 
 
 1 2^2. HE. ToiOvSt, 0101/ €£ 779 TUl/Opomtl/01/ €7TL)(€lpl')aa9 
 
 d 5/)(a SieXeaOcu yei/os 8icupoi KaOdirep ol -iroXXol tcoi/ 
 ii/0a8e Siavt/jLOvcrt, to p.ei/ 'EXXiji/lkoi/ cos* €1/ diro 
 iravTcoi/ adxiipovvres X 60 /^' 9 ? o-vp.iraaL 8e toIs uXXols 
 ye'i/ecrii/, direipOLS overt, kcu (x/jliktoi? kcu davfJL(f)coi/0L9 
 npo? dXXrjXa, (Sdpfiapov p.ia kXh]ct€i irpocreLTrovTes 
 avro, 8td ravrrji/ rr\v jxiav kXtjctii/ kcu ytvos ev avro 
 elvcu 7rpoa8oKa>aii/' rj rov dpiOpov ris av vopLi^oi 
 kclt eldi] Svo Diaipeiv pvpiada dirorepvopevos anro 
 
 e TTOLVTCDV, MS €l> el8o? d.7TO)(C0pi(p)l/ f KCU TCp XoiTTCp 8r) 
 
 ttgu/tl Oepevos ev ovopa, 8ia rrjv kXtjctlv av kcu tovt 
 dijioi yevos eKelvov x^P^ erepov ev ylyvecrOai. KaX- 
 Xlov Se irov kcu fiaXXov kclt etdrj kcil 8lxa Siaipolr 
 av, el tov fiei/ dpiOfiov dpruo kcu TrepiTTCp ti? re/ivoi, 
 
 divide 
 mankind 
 into ' 
 
 and Barba- 
 rian, and 
 bo would 
 any one 
 who divi- 
 5 ded nuni- 
 !■■ ra into 
 ten thou- 
 sand mtkI 
 
 all i> 
 
 ten thou- 
 sand. It 
 would be 
 more scien- 
 tific to dis- 
 IO tiugniflh 
 number 
 into odd 
 and even, 
 and man- 
 kind into 
 male and 
 female, and 
 not to in- 
 
 3. ivddbe~\ Sc. Kara rrjv 'EX- 
 XaSa. 
 
 ro pev — TrpoadoKwaij These 
 words are explanatory of Siave- 
 ixoviri. Hence, as elsewhere 
 explained, the absence of a 
 connecting particle, or relative. 
 Or perhaps it is better to sup- 
 pose a return from the par- 
 ticiple to the indicative in 
 TvpoadoKaxri. 
 
 5. yeveaiv — Trpoaenrovres avro] 
 There is a change of construc- 
 tion : that at first intended 
 
 being (3dp(3apov ev ovopa depevoi, 
 
 or something of the kind. 
 avro, which resumes o-vp.Tr. t. a. 
 yev., is suggested by the accu- 
 sative (Bdpfiapov. The grammar 
 may, of course, be saved by 
 omitting avro. But this is 
 unnecessary : 7mXcu yap iapev 
 
 dvdiikea> tcov tolovtcciv. 
 
 dp'iKTots kci\ d<Tvp.(fid>vois~\ "Nei- 
 ther holding any intercourse (or 
 intermarrying, vid. inf. 265 e) 
 
 nor understanding one an- 
 other's speech." 
 
 8. vopl£oi] " Should use," 
 " be wont," " adopt the custom 
 of." Cf. Legg. 10, 908 e: to 
 
 6eois vopi^ov dpeXelv eL8os. 
 
 9. divoTepvopevos ] For the 
 middle voice, cf. Soph. 287 a, 
 Phsedr. 266 a. 
 
 13. pa\\ov — Si'xa] Compare 
 the stress which is laid on 
 the bisection, if possible, of 
 each kind, in Phileb. 16 d : 
 
 perd piav ovo, e'i ttcos eltri, ovco- 
 
 ■nelv. Cf. supr. 262 a : 1-6 £7- 
 
 rovpevov ev o"i7rXao-i'oicrt ravvv ev 
 Tois ripicrecriv els Tore Troirjcrei 
 
 fyrelcrdai : an injunction which 
 suggested the rule which the 
 answer has violated. There 
 is here the same love of pro- 
 portion and equality which 
 appears in Aristotle's account 
 of Justice. See especially his 
 etymology of oWonfo quasi 
 
 Ol^a(TTt]S. 
 
 D 2 
 
20 
 
 IIAATONOS 
 
 troduce 
 such acci- 
 dental dif- 
 
 f.T.'lii-i'S as 
 
 Lydian or 
 J 'In" gian 
 (not to say 
 Greek), 
 until he 
 were at a 
 loss for a 
 distinction 
 which had 
 a rational 
 ground. 
 But, it may 
 be asked, 
 how can we 
 tell when a 
 division is 
 accidental 
 and when 
 real? This 
 question is 
 reserved : 
 and we re- 
 turn to the 
 distinction 
 of young- 
 Socrates, 
 between 
 man and 
 the brutes. 
 Which is 
 just as if 
 that ra- 
 tional and 
 politic ani- 
 mal the 
 
 to 8e av tcov dvOpcoTrow yevos dppevi koll GrjXei, p. 
 AvSov s 8e i] fypvyas rj TLvas eTepov? irpo? diravTa? 
 
 TCLTTitiV U7rO(T)(L(j)L T0T6, TjVLKa OflTOpOL yeVO? CipLOL KOLL 
 
 fxepo? evp[<JK€LV eKaTepov tcov o-yLcrQevTcov. p. 
 
 5 NE. 20. 'OpOoraTa. dXXa yap tovto clvto, co 
 Ije've, ttco? av tl? yevo? Ka\ fxepo? evapyeuTepov yvoLrj, 
 to? ov ravrov earou aAA' eTepov dXXrjXoiv ; 
 
 37E. 'O jSe'Aricrre dvdpcov, ov (pavXov TrpocrTaTTeL?, 
 ^EcoKpaTe?. r)iiel? /xeV klxl vvv jiaKpoTepav TOV OCOVTO? 
 ioa7ro tov irpoTeOevTO? Xoyov TreirXaviyieOa, av cf en 
 irXe'ov r)fia? KeXeveL? TfXavijdrjvaL. vvv fiev ovv, cocnrep 
 ej/co?, erravLcopLev ttolXlv' ravra oe elcravQi? Kara cryp- 
 Xrjv, KaOairep lyvevovTe?, p.eTLp.ev. ov firjv dXXa tovto h 
 ye av iravTairaaL 0u'Aa£ou ? firj iroTe Trap epiov Sotjy? 
 15 avTO evapyco? 8Lcopio~fievov dfcrjicoevai. 
 NE. 20. To Trohv ; 
 
 HE. Ei'oo? re koI fiepo? eTepov dXXrjXcov eivai. 
 NE. 20. TV tirjv ; 
 
 SE. 'Off eldo? fiev OTav r) tov, Ka\ fiepo? amo 
 10 avayKolov eivai tov TrpdyjxaTO? OTOvirep av el8o? 
 
 16 
 
 2. Avhovs 8e rj <&pvyas f)' Ttvas 
 
 erepovs] There is deep irony 
 in the substitution of these 
 despised names (Eur. Ale. 675: 
 3> ttcu, tip' alxeis, iroTepa Av8dv 
 i) fypvya kokoIs eXavveiv apyvpa>- 
 vtjtov ueOev) for that of "EXhrjves 
 
 as opposed to Bapfiapoi : and 
 the same view is continued 
 presently, where, to shew the 
 nature of the distinction be- 
 tween men and beasts, cranes 
 are put in the place of men, 
 whom they are supposed in 
 turn to include amongst the 
 beasts. 
 
 5. tovto ai)To\ Sc. Xeye or 
 
 4>pa£e implied in the question. 
 
 13. KaBanep l%vevovTes] Cf. 
 
 Theaet. 187 e : ovk. airb Kaipov 
 
 TTtikiv (oo-rrep 'l^vos peTe\6elv. 
 
 14. pr) ivore 86^rjs auro] avTO 
 
 is again used with a more dis- 
 tinct reference to what follows 
 than to what precedes. 
 
 17. eTepov] By attraction 
 
 for eTepa. 
 
 19. 'Sis ei8os pev — awryfer;] Cf. 
 
 Prot. 350 c, where the non- 
 convertibility of a universal 
 affirmative is similarly noticed 
 as a new thought. See also 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 21 
 
 263. XlyryraC pepos 8e dSo? ov8epla avayicr). ravrrj p.e 
 7] Keivr) fiaWov, a> ^LcoKpaTC?, da. (jjaOt Xcyeiv. 
 
 NE. 20. Tavr earat. 
 u SE. <\>pacrov Sij fj.01 to /xer« tovto. 
 
 NE. 20. Uohv ; < 
 
 SE. To tt)s airoTrXavr]ae(i)9 biroOtv rjpas Sevp 
 rjyayeu. oificu pilv yap ptdXicrTa, oOev epcor^deh o~v 
 ttjv dyeXaioTpofplav oivq StaLpereou aVe? paXa irpo- 
 Ovficos oV tlvai ^cocou yevi], to pev dvOpomtvov, ere- 
 pov Se T(ov aXXodv ^vpnrdvTtov Grjpicov ev. 
 
 NE. 20. 'AX-qOTj. 
 
 fiE. Kcu kpoiye Sr) tot e([)av7]s pepos d(f)atpcoi> 
 rjyeixrOcu KaTaXtireiv to Xolttov av iravTcov yivos ev, 
 otl TTOLcri tclvtov lirovopd^uv sayes ovopa, Orjpia 
 KaXeaas. ] 
 
 d NE. 20. 'H^ KOU TaVTCt 0VTC0S. 
 
 SE. To 8e ye, co irdvTu>v dvSpeioTaTe, Tay av, 
 
 crane wr< re 
 to put 
 cram in 
 
 gory, and 
 
 the "ili' i- 
 animals, 
 including 
 men, in 
 another, 
 with, it 
 may I"-, bhe 
 Bame name 
 of ' bruti -.' 
 Such crude 
 logic must 
 be avoided 
 here. 
 
 ib. 329c! : Tvorepov — axnrep irpoa- 
 a>7rcv ra p.6pia — aropa re kci\ 
 pis k.t.A. fj &<rnep ra tov ypucroi) 
 p.6pia K.r.X. 
 
 I. pe'pos 8e (l8os ov$ep.ia av- 
 
 ayKT)] At whatever point divi- 
 sion is made, that which is cut 
 off is equally a part. But each 
 euW, besides being part of a 
 whole, has a natural unity and 
 a character distinct from that 
 of every other part. 
 
 6. oiroOev ljyayev\ Cf. Rep. 
 
 8, 543 6 : Ti66iV bevpo e^erpa- 
 
 7. udev] By attraction for 
 
 eKeWev ov. 
 
 8. paka npodvpas] Supra 
 262 a: npoOvpoTura digpTjaai. 
 
 12. tot] Bodl. AIT. tovt : 
 which would seem plausible 
 but for the absence of the 
 
 article, pe'pos is used empha- 
 tically as opp. to yevos : a part, 
 but not necessarily a kind. 
 
 13. Ka.TciXnre'ii' to \oitt6v aii 
 ivavTav yevos eV ] " That you 
 
 had left in what remained, one 
 class including all." 
 
 14. iirovopa^iv KtiAecray] 
 
 Note the redundancy. 
 
 17. To fie -ye] " Whereas in 
 truth." Cf. (amongst many 
 instances) Legg. 1, 630 d : to 
 
 be TTms XP'1 V W<is \eyeiv ; 
 
 ib iravTUtv ai'Spetorare] So 
 
 also Legg. 10, 905 c. 
 
 This passage has a real, 
 though remote, bearing on 
 two questions which have been 
 associated also in recent in- 
 quiry — the reality of species, 
 and the relation of man to 
 the lower animals. Plato, 
 
22 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 ei 7rov (fjpovi/jLou earl n twov erepou, oiov Sokcl to p. 263. 
 t(dv yepavwv, r) tl tolovtov aAAo, # Kara ravra Icrcos 
 
 while believing firmly in the 
 existence of lines of demarca- 
 tion in Nature corresponding 
 to the distinctions of science 
 (not to those of common lan- 
 guage and opinion), appears, 
 so far as he has a serious 
 meaning under the mask of 
 irony, to recognize the possi- 
 bility of a closer relationship 
 between the human species 
 and other animal forms than 
 is readily acknowledged by 
 man. The object of the whole 
 passage, however, from p. 262 
 a, is, probably, to correct a 
 misapprehension to which the 
 reasoning of the Sophist might 
 give rise. The antithesis of 
 Being and Not-Being is in the 
 abstract exhaustive, and the 
 purely abstract notion of to p.r) 
 ov is perfectly definite. But 
 in pai'ticular inquiries, such as 
 the present, it is not enough 
 to distinguish logically, a pri- 
 ori, between "this" and "all 
 that is not this." My con- 
 ception of "this" gains no- 
 thing from being opposed to 
 a wholly indefinite idea in 
 which there is no unity, and 
 which is therefore not an 
 idea. If the process of divi- 
 sion is to acid anything to 
 knowledge, the conceptions 
 which exclude each other 
 must both be clearly seen, and 
 so must the boundary which 
 divides them. In other words, 
 there must be a reasonable 
 and clearly understood ground 
 or principle for each dicho- 
 tomy. The positive as well 
 as the negative element of the 
 conception which is rejected 
 
 must be recognized, in order 
 that the negative as well as 
 the positive content of the 
 selected notion may be appre- 
 hended. For instance, the 
 comparative study of Natural 
 History, Anatomy, and Physi- 
 ology gives a far more com- 
 plete notion of man's physical 
 nature than is arrived at 
 through the observation of man 
 himself, or through the mere 
 distinction at first hand be- 
 tween man and the brutes. 
 
 1. (ppovip.ov — to tcov yepdvcov\ 
 
 The migratory habits of the 
 crane gave him an important 
 place in ancient fable. (H"m. 
 II. r. 3-7.) Aristotle suggests 
 the following reasons for sup- 
 posing the existence of reason 
 in the crane. De Anim. H. ix. 
 1 1 : <&p6vifia Se 7roXAa ku\ irepX 
 to>v yepdveov So/cet o~vp.(3alvetv. 
 
 €KTOTTL^OVO-l yap fiaKpCLV, KO.I tig 
 
 v\}sos tt£tovtm npos to Kadopav to. 
 noppco' kcu iav 'idcoai ve(prj Kai 
 Xmiepia, KciTaTVTacrai f]0-vxd£ov- 
 criv. *Eti 8e ro ex elv f]yep-6va re 
 kcu tovs eniavpiTTovTas iv rots 
 ea^aTOLs, waTe KaraKOvecrdai ttjv 
 (pa>vr]i>. "Orav 8e Kade£a>VT<u, at 
 fxev SXkai vtto tt} TTTepvyi ttjv 
 KeCpaXrjv i\ovo-ai Ka6ev8ovcrLv eVi 
 ivos 7ro86s eva\\a§, 6 8e r]yep.tov 
 yvp.urjv <?xav ttjv K€(pa\rjV irpoopq, 
 ku\ OTav aicrflrjTai tl ar]p.aipei 
 (3o5>v. 
 
 to tcov yepavcov] Sc. yivos, 
 infr. Or simply = oi yipavoi. 
 Cf. SUpr. : to Tjji airoTvKavrjCTecos. 
 
 2. * KCITO. TCLVTa] MSS. 6 KdTU 
 
 TavTa. 6, which the Zurich 
 editors reject and Bekker and 
 Hermann include in brackets, 
 is indefensible because inter- 
 
OOAITIKOI. 
 
 28 
 
 263. Siovopdlpi, KaOdirep koll <tv, yepdvovs plv ev yevos 
 avTLTiOev rots aWois {wois koll Gdpvvvov avro eavro, 
 rd <5e aWa perd tcdv dvOpdmc£>v tjvA\<tfioi> eh ravro 
 ovSeu aXXo nXyu laws Orjpia irpoduiroL. TrtipaOcopev 
 ovv -qpeis etjevXafleicrOai irdvb v OTroaa roiavra. 5 
 
 c NE. 20. Urn ; 
 
 HE. M?) irdv to tgov (jooov ylvos Siacpovpevoi, Iva 
 i-jttov avrd irdayaipev. 
 
 NE. 20. OvSev yap Set. 
 
 SE. Kal yap ovv koll Tore -qpaprdvero ravrrf. 10 
 
 NE. 20. T/&J; 
 
 SE. Tfjs yvcoaTiKr}? ocrov tiriraKTiKOv rjplv pepos, 
 yv ttov tov £coorpo(j)LKOV yevovs, ayeXaiwv prjv (jucov. 
 
 v yap; 
 
 rupting the sense between av 
 and 8iovopd£oi, where the opt. is 
 required by rrpoaeiiroi infr. 810- 
 vofia£oi = distinguish in words. 
 Note the return to the more 
 direct constr. in irpocre'nroi. 
 
 2. crepvvvov iavro ] Cf. 
 
 Phileb. 28 d: ol aocpoi, eavrovs 
 euros crepvyvovres. 
 
 4. Trpoa-einoi] There is a re- 
 turn from the participial to the 
 more direct construction. 
 
 5. igevkafteiaOai — TOtavra ] 
 " Keep ourselves quite free 
 from any such error." 
 
 Where the use of compounds 
 is so frequent, it is unsafe to 
 lay too much stress on the 
 meaning of prefixes. Hence 
 in Soph. 231 c (where see note) 
 perhaps egava-rrvevaapev means 
 
 simply " to recover breath," as 
 in Phsedr. 254 c. 
 
 7. Mi) Trav to tu>v (a>a>v 8iaip.] 
 " By not making the whole 
 animal kingdom the object of 
 
 our (final) division." I. e. By 
 first subdividing it so as to 
 deal with a part only. 
 
 8. avrd] Cf. Theast. 207 d : 
 
 8pu>vTas avrd. 
 
 9. OvBev yap Sei] Either " In- 
 deed we must not :" or, if ovdev 
 refers to tjttov, " We must avoid 
 it altogether — be (not less liable 
 but) not at all liable to this 
 mistake." The former is more 
 idiomatic. 
 
 1 o. Kal roVe] Also in a former 
 division : viz. 261 d, where 
 we distinguished 17 tS>v dyekaiav 
 £ghov iiriTaKTLKr]. All animals, 
 whether gregarious or other- 
 wise, should have been first dis- 
 inguished into wild and tame. 
 
 12. oo-oi/ — pe'pos] Sub. rjv 
 
 from nest clause. 
 
 13. ayeKaianf u.rjv ^cocof] Cf. 
 Legg. 3, 694 e (Cyrus is spoken 
 
 of) : 6 fie' ye narrjp avTols av 
 iroLpvia pev Kal irpofiara Kal ayeXas 
 dvSpCop re Kal dXXtov noWa/v noX- 
 
 We had 
 
 already 
 erred in the 
 same direc- 
 tion when 
 we spoke of 
 our " com- 
 manding 
 science" as 
 concerned 
 with herd- 
 ed animals. 
 
9A 
 
 IIAATQNOS 
 
 For there 
 is a pre- 
 vious divi- 
 : i.iii of ani- 
 mals into 
 viM and 
 tame, and 
 this wo 
 passed 
 over. Let 
 ns be more 
 guarded, 
 now that 
 we have 
 felt the 
 truth of the 
 proverb, 
 " More 
 haste, 
 worse 
 
 We may 
 thus arrive 
 at the same 
 result, but 
 it will be 
 worked out 
 for us in a 
 more satis- 
 factory 
 way. 
 
 NE. 20. NaL p. 2M 
 
 SE. Air/p)]To tolvvv ydr] /cat tote £yp.7rav to 
 (fi>oi> rep TL0aacp /cat aypicp. ra p}v yap tyovro. p. 264 
 TiOaaeveadaL (jjvaiv rjp.epa 7rpoo-elpi]Tai, ra Se fxi] 
 5 e^ovra aypia. 
 
 NE. 20. KaAa*. 
 
 HE. ' Hu 8e ye 61-jpevopev einaTr]fnt)v, Iv Toh 
 i)}i£poL9 r\v re Kal kartv, eVrt rois ayeAat'ot? p.tv 
 fyrrjTea OpepLjiacriv. 
 10 NE. 20. Nat. 
 
 HE. Niij tolvvv Siacpcofieda wairep Tore, irpos 
 airavra ajrofiXetyavTes, p.r)be crTrtvaavTes, u>a 8rj 
 Tayv yevcofxeOa irpos rfj TroAtrt/cj}. ireiroirjKe yap b 
 y/uias /cat vvv iraOtiv to KaTa Tt]v irapoi\xlav iraOos. 
 15 NE. 20. Uohv ; 
 
 HE. Oi))( rjcrvypvs ev BiaipovvTas rjuvKevac fipabv- 
 Tepov. 
 
 NE. 20. Kat /caAcos* ye, d> £eW, ireTrou-jKev . 
 
 HE. TavT eaTco. itolXlv <5' ovv i£ ocpxi^ 
 
 ™rr)i> koivot potyatrjv 7T6ipcof.ieOa dtaipelv' tcra)? yap 
 
 Kal tovto, o o~v 7rpodvjj.€?, dcaTrepaLvofievos 1 o 
 
 Xa? eKTaro. lb. 5 j 735 • 7T <* a ' av 
 dyeXrju noipip kcu /3oukoXo? rpo- 
 (psvs re ovk aAXcos /z?;7rore eVtxei- 
 pi]<Tj) Qeptmtveiv. 
 
 3. e^ovra — <pv<riv\ l Whose 
 nature admitted of domestica- 
 tion." 
 
 8. ?»] Cf. 263 e. 
 
 fxev introduces a qualifica- 
 tion, which would be expressed 
 in English by an emphasis on 
 the adjective. 
 
 12. tva 8tj] Cf. Theset. 183a: 
 
 iva 8rj 6p6rj (pavfj, 
 
 1 6. Ov% r/avxovs — [SpabvTepov] 
 
 The proverb ( = " More haste, 
 worse speed") seems to be given 
 verbatim, except that biaipovv- 
 Tas is substituted for some more 
 general word. 
 
 eS] "Carefully." 
 
 18. Kat KaKas ye] I. e. " We 
 
 have reason to be glad of the 
 delay." 
 
 2 I . tovto civto o (TV npodvpel] 
 
 I. e. the definition of man, as 
 the object of the statesman's 
 art. Supr. 262 b : tSa>i> in av- 
 Bp&movs 7ropevop.evov. 
 
 dianepaiv6p,evos — pr/viiaa] Cf. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 25 
 
 2^>4- Xoyos avTO? aoi KaXXiov fxrjvvau. kcjll pot 
 (j)pd£e. 
 
 NE. 20. Uohv Si] ; 
 
 HE. ToSe, el TLV(£>v 7ro\\aKi? apa SlOLKrjKOa 1 }' 01) 
 
 c yap 8i) 7rpoo-TV)(rjs ye olvto? olS" on ye'yovas rats ev 
 
 ra> NelXco TiOao-elai? tu>v lydvcov /cat tcou ev rah 
 
 fiacriXiKcus Xlpvai?. ev p.ev yap K.pr\vais rax av 
 
 'term elrjg rjcrOrjpevos. 
 
 NE. 20. Haw pev ovv Ka\ ravra redeap.at kul- 
 Ktiva iroXXwv aKrjKoa. 
 
 HE. Kat prjv \7)Vofi(x>Tias ye Kal yepavoficorla?, 
 
 < . , garious 
 tame ani- 
 
 i mals in- 
 clude 
 shoals of 
 fish and 
 flocks of 
 geese and 
 cranes: as 
 witness the 
 fishponds 
 of Egypt 
 
 IO and Baby- 
 lon and the 
 plains of 
 Thessaly. 
 
 Le gg- 7> 199 e: K&v V M£' 
 
 o8os avTT) 6X77 cr^ouera re'Aos iko.- 
 va>s av pr/vvo-eie Kal to vvv 8uitto- 
 povpevov. Al'ist. Pol. III. 3 : ovt6 
 yap (pavev to \ex@ev irotel bifkov. 
 
 I. avTOS prjvvcrei] Cf. Thefet. 
 
 2 00 e : Tax' Q.V avTO (fiyjveie to 
 ^Tovpevov. Phileb. 20 : irpo'ibv 8' 
 €Ti aa(pe'arepov 8ei£ei. 
 
 4. TdoV, el Tivav\ " This, 
 
 whether you have perhaps 
 heard of it." Cf. Thetet. 158c: 
 
 to ttoIov ' 6 noXkaKis ere olpat 
 8iaKt]Koivai ipcoTcovTcov k.t.X. It 
 
 does not seem certain whether 
 noXkaKis is here " perhaps" (cf. 
 Laches 194 a, Protag. 361 c, 
 Polit. infr. 283 b) or "often :" 
 cf. noWmv infr. c. But the for- 
 mer is more probable. 
 
 5. Trpoo-Tvxr]i] This word oc- 
 curs again in the Laws and 
 Epinomis, and nowhere else 
 in Plato, or indeed in Greek. 
 
 6. Tidacreiais] This word, an 
 abstract noun formed from 
 Tidao-evco, occurs nowhere else 
 in classical Greek. The plural 
 of the abstract noun is used to 
 express the concrete. 
 
 tcov iv Tals (3. Xifivaii] Sc. 
 Ixdvcov. As if the former phrase 
 had been Tals tcov iv t<o N. 
 Ix8v<>>v Tidao-elais. " I know VOU 
 
 have never had an opportunity 
 of seeing how tame fish are 
 kept in the Nile and in the 
 ponds of the Great King." 
 
 II. yepavoficoTias] The flocks 
 
 of cranes are probably sug- 
 gested by the previous mention 
 of the crane. The crane is 
 classed with man by Aristotle 
 
 as not only dyeXaiov but ito\iti- 
 kov &ov, the form of his con- 
 stitution being a monarchy. 
 De Anim. Hist. I. 1. § 11 : iro- 
 
 \lTlKCL 8' ea-rlv cuv ev Tl Kal K01V0V 
 yiyverai ndvTcov to epyov, onep ov 
 TrdvTa Tvoiei to. dyikala. "Eari 8e 
 tolovtov avdpconos, peXiTTa, (r<frr)£, 
 pvpprj^, yepavos. Kal tovtwv to. 
 pev vcp' ijyepova iaTi, to. o° avapxa, 
 oiov yepavos pev Kal to tcov pe\iT- 
 tcov yevos v(f> rjyepova, pvppr]Kes 
 8e Kal pvpla r/XXa avapxa. Com- 
 pare Plat. Phsfido 82 b: 7roXt- 
 tikov re Kal ijpepov -yei/or, fj irov 
 peXiTTcov, j) aqbrjKcov 7] pvpprjKcov — 
 t] to dvdpairwov. 
 
( 26 
 
 HAAT0N02 
 
 Hence the 
 art of herd- 
 ing may be 
 
 divided 
 into sub- 
 aqueous and 
 terrene. 
 And of the 
 terrene 
 creatures, 
 one kind 
 are fledged. 
 Statecraft 
 is occupied 
 with the 
 walking 
 terrene 
 animals : 
 and for 
 dividing 
 these, rea- 
 son points 
 out a longer 
 and a short- 
 er way. 
 The former 
 is more in 
 accordance j 
 with the 
 principles 
 above laid 
 down, 
 but, as we 
 have lei- 
 sure, we 
 may try 
 both — of 
 course in 2 
 turn : tak- 
 ing the 
 longer 
 way first, 
 whilst we 
 are fresh. 
 
 el kcu fir) TreirXdirqaai irepi to. GerraAi/ca 7re8la, p. 264 
 
 7T€7TVaaL yOVV KCU 7TICTT€V€L9 elvOLl. 
 
 NE. 20. Ti pr]v ; 
 
 HE. Tovo' IveKCL toi ttolvtol r)pu)Tr}aa TOLVTO., SlOTl d 
 rr)s tcqv dyeXalcov rpo(f)rjs eaTi fiev evvSpov, can 8e 
 /cat ij-qpofiaTiKOis. 
 
 NE. 20. "Ecrri yap ovv. 
 
 HE. 'Ap ovv kou aoi £vv8ok€i ravrr] 8elv 8u^a- 
 
 {jELV Tr}V KOlVOTpO(f)lKr)v €7T ICTTr) fir}V ', €0' eKarepcp TOV- 
 
 tcov to fiepo? avrr)? kirivifiovras eKarepov, to fiev 
 erepov vypoTpo<fiiKov ovofidtpvTas, to 5' erepov i^r}po- 
 Tpo(f)LKov ; 
 
 NE. 20. "Efioiye. 
 
 iSE. Kcu fir)v kcu to fiaaiXiKov ovtw? ov tflTr)- 
 ao/iev biroTepas eaTi Trj? ri)(yrjs' SrjXov yap 8rj e 
 iravTL. 
 
 NE. 20. Um 8 ov ; 
 
 SE. Ha? fiev Sr) to ye £r}poTpo(j)LKov Trj? dye- 
 XaioTpofyias SieXoiT dv (j)vXov. 
 
 NE. 20. n^y ; 
 
 SE. Ta> TTTYjvcp T€ Kal ire(j£> diopiadfievos. 
 
 NE. 20. ' K\r}6eo-TaTa. 
 
 HE. Tt de' ; to ttoXltlkov *&>? nrepY* to ire^ov 
 
 4. ToCS' evena rot] Cf. Theset. 
 185 d : rov8e toi evena avrd croi 
 diaKpi^ovfiai. 
 
 5. (grjpoPariKov r.) The words 
 ewbpov and £r]po@aTLK.6v are ap- 
 plied to birds by Aristotle, in 
 the only other place where the 
 latter word occurs in classical 
 Greek. H. A. vi. 2. § 1 (ubi 
 
 VulgO gripofticoTiKov). 
 
 14. Kal p.r)u Kal — iravri"] " If 
 
 we divide thus, we shall also 
 
 be saved the trouble of asking 
 to which art the kingly func- 
 tion belongs : for this will be 
 evident to all," ovtcos = tovto 
 
 7T0irjaavres. 
 
 23. * cos nepl* to ire£6v] Stall- 
 bauni is wrong in saying that 
 Bekker took his reading el 7repl 
 from the majority of MSS. 
 The following are the varia- 
 tions, as quoted by him : — el 
 
 nepl ; axnrep E ; rj acrnep C et 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 Ti 
 
 264. £qrr)Teov ; rj ovk o'lei koll rhv d(j)povearaTov cos eVoy 
 elirew Boijdfikiv ovtcov ; 
 
 NE. 20. "Eycoye. 
 
 HE. T?}^ 8e 7retpvoi±LKr]V) Ka.0a.7rep apriou dpi- 
 Ofxov, 8el Tep.vop.evriv 8tya dirofyaiveiv . 5 
 
 NE. 20. ^\ou. 
 
 HE. Kal /jlyju e(j) o ye fie'pos coppajKeir rjfiiv 6 
 \6yos, eV €K€Li>o 8vo TLve KaOopav 68a> rerafie'va 
 (J)aiveTai, rrjv /xeV Odrrco, 7rpos fieya fiepos a/JUKpoi' 
 8LaLpov/j,€i>i]i>, ti-]v 8e, oirep ev ra irpocrOev eXeyofiev, 10 
 otl 8ei fjLecroTOfieiv u>s fiaXiara, tout e\ovaav /uaA- 
 
 265. \oi>, ixaKporepav ye fxrju. e^ecmv ovv, biroTepav av 
 fiov\7]6ol>iiev, ravTTjv iropevOrjvaL. 
 
 rcF; 17 (oo-jrep H ; toWep # r 
 (i. e. the rest with Stephanus' 
 eel.) Bekker's reading, el irepl 
 t. ir., £rjTT)Teov, would be more 
 plausible if Kal prjv — ov Cl T ^i~ 
 aop.ev were immediately pre- 
 ceding. Heindorf's, 9 nepl r. 
 it. £., is not improbable in itself, 
 but has weak MS. confirma- 
 tion. 
 
 If as nepl is right, this had 
 probably been corrupted into 
 <do-rrepii, and hence, through 
 transposition, the variety. This 
 reading involves a consider- 
 able ellipse, viz. of rj ko.1 tovto 
 8rj\ov; or the like words. Cf. 
 Soph. 248 d : To fie, as, K.T.X., 
 and note. 
 
 4. Kaddnep apriov apiBpov ] 
 
 Stallb. has adopted Ast's conj., 
 
 Ka&dnep apri tov a., but such a 
 
 reference would be superfluous 
 and without point. The Stran- 
 ger, as presently appears more 
 clearly, does not forget the stu- 
 dies in which young Socrates 
 
 has been imbued by Theodoras, 
 and uses ' even number' as a 
 familiar example of that which 
 can be halved : the object being 
 still to divide each class as 
 nearly as possible in the middle 
 (peo-OTopelv infr., iv fjpio-eo-i — 
 £r)Telo-6at. supr.). Comp. Legg. 
 10, 895 e, cited by the Zurich 
 editors, who are curiously mis- 
 understood by Stallbaum. The 
 definition of even number is 
 there said to be 6 St^a 8iaipov- 
 fievos. There is probably no 
 distinct allusion to the former 
 mention of clpriov Kal nepiT- 
 rov. 
 
 7. SpiiqKev] Cf. supi*. 262 b : 
 in dvOpanovs nopevopevov. 
 
 8. KaOopav — (paiverai] Sc. o 
 hoyos, still personified. 
 
 1 1. peo-orope'iv] The same love 
 of ' measure' appears as an 
 ethical notion in Legg. 7, 793 
 
 a : tov Xvnrjs re Kal fjdovrjs aKpa- 
 tov 0iov (pevyeiv 8elv ndvras, 
 piaov hi riva repveiv del. 
 
 E 2 
 
28 
 
 I1AA10N02 
 
 Gregarious 
 tame ani- 
 mals that 
 walk the 
 earth either 
 have or 
 have not 
 horns. 
 This dis- 
 tinction is 
 sufficiently 
 intelligible 
 without in- 
 venting a 
 name. 
 
 NE. 20. 17 8e ; ap.(j)0T6pas a8vvaT0v ; p. 
 
 HE. 'Afia y, w OavfxaaTC Iv fiepei ye p.r)v 
 8r}Xov otl 8vvaTov. 
 
 NE. 20. 'Ei> fiepei roivvv eycoye ap.(f)OTepa$ at- h 
 spovfxat. 
 
 HE. 'PaSiov, e7rei8r} rb Xonrov ftpayv. kut ap\as 
 /xr)i> kou fieaovcTLV a/JLa rrjs iropeLas ^aXeirbv av rjv 
 i)fiiv to 7rp6arayfJLa' vvv 8\ eVeiS?) 8oKel ravrr), rrjv 
 HOLKpoTepav irporepov 'IcopLeV veaXearepot yap ovre? 
 topaov avrrjv wopevcropeOa. rrjv 8e 8y 8iaip€<TLv opa. 
 ' NE. 20. Aeye. 
 HE. Ta ire^a rjplv rwv rjp.eponv, oaairep ayeAoua, 
 8irjprjp.eva iari (pvaei 8lya. 
 NE. 20. T/w; 
 15 HE. Tc3 tcov piev tt)v ylvecriv axepcov elvai, tcov 
 8e Kepaacpopov. c 
 
 NE. 20. Qaiverai. 
 
 HE. Trjv 8r] TretpvopiKrjv 8ieXcov a.7ro8os eKarepcp 
 
 rco pt-epei, Xoycp \ptop.evo9, av yap ovoptd^eiv avra 
 
 20 fiovXrjOf)?, ecrrai aoi 7rep1.7re7rXeyp.evov pcaXXov tov 
 
 8koVTOS. 
 
 2. 3> 6avfj,acrT€^ " What a 
 thing to ask !" This expres- 
 sion throws some light on the 
 common use of Z> davpaaie. 
 
 4. aptpOTepas] TropevOrjvai is 
 
 probably to be supplied. 
 
 6. eTrei8rj — /3pavu] The poor 
 youth is deceived into thinking 
 that he is near the end of his 
 
 journey : to 8° rjv apa, coy e'oiKe, 
 irpoolptov. 
 
 Kar dpxas] This is one of 
 the expressions which occur 
 frequently in the Politicus and 
 Laws. 
 
 0. veaXeo-repoi'] " While still 
 
 fresh." See Passow or Liddell 
 and Scott sub. v. 
 
 1 5. rrjv yeveo-iv] " Their growth 
 or mode of existence." yevecris 
 here almost = <pv<ris. " In that 
 some are produced without 
 horns and others with them." 
 
 18. <i7rdSoj] Sc. to 7rpoo-rJKOv, 
 or ttjv irpoo-p-qa-iv, which would 
 be generally ovopa, but here 
 \6yov. Compare Antisthenes' 
 sneer, that definition is only a 
 roundabout way of naming. 
 
 20. Trepnr(7r\(ypevov] E. g. 
 Kepo<popovop.€VTiKT], KoXoftoKepaTO- 
 
 vopiKT]. " Using description, 
 
I10AITIK02. 
 
 29 
 
 265. NE. 20. Fleas ovv xpi] Xeyeiv ; 
 
 HE. C 06V ti]9 Trt{pvofiiKr)9 e7TLarrj/iy]^ °^X a $ laL - 
 peOeiarjs to /utopiov Oarepov eVrt ra Kepocfjopco fiepei 
 tw tyj9 aycXys i7riT6Ta.)(@cu, to Se erepov em ra> ti)s 
 aKepdrov. 
 
 NE. 20. TaDr eara) ravrr) Xe\6evTa' TrdvTcos 
 d yap iKat'wy <5e&/Acoraf. 
 
 HE. Kat /X771/ o ye fiaonXev? t)puv av Kara- 
 (j)avrj9 otl koXo(3ov dyeXrjv tlvol KepaTcov vo- 
 fxevet. 
 
 NE. 20. ritoy yap ov SrjXo? ; 
 
 HE. Tavrrjv tolvvv KaraOpavcravTes, to yiyvo- 
 fievov avrco ireipcoixeda airobovvaL. 
 
 NE. 20. Udvv ye. 
 
 HE. Ylorepov ovv fiovXei tco a\LCTTcp re kcu tw 
 KaXovp.evo') /xcovv^l Siaipelv avTyv i] rfj Koivoyovla re 
 /cat Xhioyovla ; \xav6dveis yap irov. 
 
 NE. 20. To ttoIov ; 
 
 HE. "Ort to ptev tcov Ittttcov koi ovcov Tre<fivKev 
 ilj aXXrjXtav yevvav. 
 e NE. 20. No/. 
 
 The king 
 is the 
 keeper <>f 
 a hornless 
 10 herd. But 
 hornless 
 cattle are 
 again di- 
 vided by a 
 double dis- 
 tinction : 
 into those 
 which mix 
 the breed 
 5 and divide 
 not the 
 hoof, and 
 those which 
 divide the 
 foot and do 
 not mix 
 their breed. 
 
 for should you attempt to name 
 them, the result would be too 
 complicated." The caution 
 would apply still more point- 
 edly to what follows. 
 
 4. tco Ttjs aKepdrov] Sc. fiepei. 
 
 The genitive of apposition is 
 used (instead of tco aKepdra) by 
 attraction from dyeXrjs prece- 
 ding. 
 
 9. KoXoftov — nepdrav] " A 
 polled herd." The gen. after 
 a privative adj., like o^oXkos 
 
 do-TTl8cDV. 
 
 12. to yiyvopevav] "That 
 
 which falls to him." Cf. Legg. 1 1, 
 
 920 C : Icjelv ~\rjpp.d re Ka\ dvd- 
 Xcopa tL 7T0Te Tea Kcnrrp\co KepSos 
 Troiet to peTpiov' ypd^avras 8e, 
 6eivai to Yiyi'ou.ei'oi/ dvdXcojia kci\ 
 \rjp.pa' Kai (pvXdTTew. lb. 12, 
 949 d : to 8e vopiapa yiyvecr6ai 
 TJj noXei. Thuc. V. 49 : 6 tco 
 6eco ylyverai avrol inep ineivcov 
 eKricreiVi 
 
 15. tco Kcikovpevcp pcovv^i] This 
 
 expression indicates the fact 
 that pebw^ was a rare 'word out 
 of Homer. The characteristic 
 of having solid hoofs is found 
 to be coincident with that of 
 making hybrids. 
 
30 
 
 nAATON02 
 
 The latter 
 description 
 includes 
 only two 
 kinds. 
 For dogs, 
 though so- 
 ciable, are 
 not grega- 
 rious. The 
 ground of 
 distinction 
 between 
 these two 
 should be 
 obvious to 
 a friend of 
 Theretetus 
 and a geo- 
 metrician. 
 Man walks 
 by a power 
 of two feet: 
 the remain- 
 ing kind is 
 potentially 
 represent- 
 ed by the 
 
 mE. To 6Y ye Xonrov eTi t^s - Ae/a? dyeAi]? tcdv p. 
 ?]fMpcoi> dfiiye? yevei 7rpbs dXXrjXa. 
 
 NE. 20. Ylw t? ov ; 
 
 iHE. Tt 6° ; 6 7to\ltikos ap eVrt/xe'Aetaz/ eytw 
 S (pcLLveraL iroTepa Koivoyevovs (frvaeco? rj rivos \8lo- 
 yevovs ; 
 
 NE. 20. ArjXoU OTL TYJ9 dflLKTOV. 
 
 mE. TavTrju 8r) 8el Kaddwep rd e/nrpoorOev, &>? 
 hoiKev, rjfids oV^a cWcrre'AAetJ/. 
 io NE. 20. Aet yap ovv. 
 
 SE. Kat firjv to ye ftaov, ocrov rjfiepov /cat dye- p. 
 Xahv, o~)(eSoi> irXrjv yevolv 8volv irdv rj8r) KaraKeKep- 
 fiano-Tcci. to yap tS>v Kwcav ovk eird^iov /car- 
 api6p.elv yevos coy ev dyeXaiois OpefipLaaiv. 
 15 NE. 20. Ov yap ovv. dXXa t'ivl 8rj tco 8vo 
 8iaipovp.ev ; 
 
 HE. 'Qnrep /cat 8iKaiov ye QeaiTrjTov re /cat ere 
 8iave/ieiv, eVetS?) /cat yecofieTpias diTTecrOov. 
 NE. 20. Tco ; 
 20 ££E. Tfj 8ia/JLeTpcp 8r]Trov /cat irdXiv Trj r^y 8ta~ 
 fxeTpov 8iaj±eTpop. 
 
 1. eVt] When the horse 
 and ass are taken from the 
 hornless cattle. 
 
 Xe/as] I. e. KoXofioKepaTOv. 
 
 2. apiyes yevei] " Do not mix 
 their breed." Dat. of the mode, 
 like (pvo-ei. 
 
 4. 6 noXiriKos ap'] For the 
 late position of the interroga- 
 tive 7rdrepa in the sentence, 
 compare Soph. 237 c : e'x €lv ^°- 
 Kovfxeu hv els ti, and note. Supr. 
 261 C : \eyeis 8e — norepov. Rep. 
 9, 57 I C : Aeyeis 8e Kal rlvas ; 
 
 17. biKaiov] " It is to be ex- 
 
 pected of you." Cf. Meno 85 e : 
 
 dlicaios yap el elbevai. 
 
 20. Tfj 8iap.eTpa> Btjttov] The 
 diameter of the unit square was 
 the subject of some of the ear- 
 liest lessons in that geometrical 
 arithmetic through which alone 
 numbers had hitherto been stu- 
 died : and it had been observed 
 that this diameter is equal to 
 the square-root of two. Hence, 
 a foot being always the unit, 
 this line was known both as rj 
 Sidperpos and as f] Bidperpos rj 
 dvvdp.ei Sinovs : and it is the 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 81 
 
 %66. NE. 20. Tlwy ewres ; 
 
 b HE. 'H (J)v(tls, rjv to yivos t'lficov tgov uvOpwiroiv 
 
 K€KT7]Tat, pLCOV CtAAo)? 7TQ)S €1? TtjV TTOpdaV 7T€(j)VK€V T) 
 
 KaOoarep y diapLerpo? y Swa/iet. dinovs ; 
 NE. 20. Ovk aAAwy. 
 S?E. Kat /xt)j/ 77 ye rou Kolttov yevovs Tcakiv iari 
 
 abbreviated form of the latter 
 expression, viz. 8lnovs Bvvapis, 
 which gives occasion to the 
 Stranger's somewhat laborious 
 pleasantry. 
 
 The incommensurability of 
 this diameter with the side of 
 the square (of */ 2 with i) was 
 one of the most familiar lessons 
 of this early geometry. Hence, 
 possibly a , the omission of 2 
 amongst the irpoprjiceis apidfidi 
 in the demonstration of Theo- 
 doras (Theset. 147 d : rrjs re rp'i 
 nodos rrepi Ka\ nevTeTTodos K.T.A.), 
 
 it being taken for granted, 
 without proof, that the dlrrovs 
 dvvapis Was pr]K.a. ov £vpp.(Tpos 
 rjj 7ro8iaia. 
 
 While these were still recent 
 discoveries, philosophers were 
 led to see fanciful analogies to 
 them in other departments of 
 knowledge. Plato here satir- 
 izes a tendency from which he 
 was not at this time himself 
 wholly free. The smile is al- 
 ready on his face which pre- 
 sently breaks into a laugh. 
 
 Our view has been restricted 
 to tame gregarious animals : 
 to tame animals that tread the 
 ground, that cannot fly, that 
 have no horns, that divide the 
 foot : thus oxen, horses, asses 
 are excluded ; dogs are not gre- 
 garious. What remain 1 What 
 but swine and men 1 Human 
 
 progression is measured by the 
 power of two feet, that of 
 swine, the only remaining ani- 
 mal, by the power of four. This 
 interpretation has been well 
 supported by Dr. Badham in 
 the ' Epistola' prefixed to his 
 edition of the Euthydemus and 
 Laches. 
 
 1. Hwr fines ;] " What did 
 you say 1 ?" Expressing a not 
 very unnatural surprise. 
 
 6. e'crri Kara 8vvap.1v av ttjs 
 riperepas 8vvdpecos 8idperpos] "Is 
 
 again potentially expressed by 
 the diameter of our diameter," 
 i.e. the diameter of the square of 
 which our diameter, a/ 2, is the 
 side. As the diameter of the 
 unit square is */2, so the dia- 
 meter of the square of ^/ 2 is 
 -v/4- This appears, without 
 the help of arithmetic, from 
 the following diagram : 
 
 A. 
 
 f 
 ab 1 square foot ; c d dia- 
 meter of a b, and side of 2 ft. 
 square dee; de diameter of 
 2 ft. square ; df square on 
 d e : = 4 square feet. 
 
 a As suggested by a favourable critic in the National Review. 
 
 of 
 
 buman 
 power or, 
 
 in o! Ii r 
 word . 
 
 1 1 
 a power of 
 j low 
 
32 
 
 IIAATQN02 
 
 Tims man 
 is differen- 
 tiated from 
 the pig. 
 
 Kara hvvay.iv av rrj? rjperepa? Svvdpeco? Sidperpo?, p. 266. 
 eiirtp Svoiv ye ean ttoSolv SI? ?re(f)VKvla. 
 
 NE. 20. Ylco? 6° ovk earn ; kcii Sr] kou o~)(eSbv 
 o fiov\ei SrjXovv pav&dvco. 
 
 5 mE. n.pOS Si] TOVTOl? €T€pOV av Tl TCOV TV p09 
 
 yeXcora evSoKip-rjaavToov av, co ^(DKpare?, dpa KaOo- 
 pcofiev rjplv yeyovo? iv tols Siyprfpevot? ', c 
 
 NE. SO. To ttoIov ; 
 
 SE. TdvOpwiTLvov rjpcov dpa yevo? ^vveiXrj-^b? 
 10 Kal ^vvSeSpapLrjKO? yevei rw tcov ovtcov yevvaioTaray 
 kolL dfia evyepeaTaTco. 
 
 5. erepov av] Those who 
 
 have found in these words a 
 new division, and would intro- 
 duce here some fresh kind, — 
 as geese or other domestic fowls 
 (Ast, Stallhaum), which were 
 cut off, supr. 264 e, or apes 
 (Winkelmann), which as tame 
 animals are hardly dye\aia 6pep- 
 fiara, unless M. Winkelmann 
 can find the prototype of Bea- 
 trice and her apes in classic 
 story, — were right in supposing 
 that a distinct step in the ar- 
 gument must be here indi- 
 cated. Man has been distin- 
 guished in terms of mathema- 
 tical progression from the only 
 remaining quadruped, the pig. 
 But it remains to be shewn of 
 which kind the king is herds- 
 man. It has been determined 
 what two kinds are still in 
 competition. But the result of 
 their competition remains to 
 be decided. 
 
 tcov ivpos ye~ka>ra evboKLfirjadp- 
 tiov dv] " Which might have 
 become celebrated as a joke." 
 " 'Might have won us a fellow- 
 ship in a cry' of humourists." 
 
 npos yeXcora lit. " In respect 
 of the purpose of creating 
 laughter." 
 
 9. f]p.a>v] Qu. an leg. ww, 
 cf. Soph. 217c, where the same 
 doubt occurs. " That it should 
 be the lot of our human family 
 to run a heat with the grandest, 
 and at the same time the least 
 fastidious, of all creatures." 
 
 gweikrixds] " Having been 
 appointed by lot to run with." 
 Cf. Hdt. V. 2 2 : avve^emnTe t£> 
 
 rrpccTO), and Schw. Lex. Hdt. 
 
 S. V. CTVV€K77iTTTeil>. 
 
 10. yevvaLOTara) is ironical. Cf. 
 Rep. 7 > 5 2 9 h : ovk dyevvcbs p.01 
 
 SoKeZy ttjv nepl to. civco pdOrjcriv 
 
 \ap[3dveiv Trapa aavrco fj ecm. 
 But there is perhaps a humoi'- 
 ous allusion (as Badham sup^- 
 poses) to the unwieldy bulk 
 of the creature. 
 
 11. evxepe o-rdrco ] Whereas 
 man, as it was said in the 
 Thesetetus, is 8vo-ko\ov Kal im- 
 fiovKov £5iov. Schleiermacher 
 well quotes Bep. 7, 535 e : ev- 
 
 Xep&s, cbvrrep 6rjpiov veiov — iv 
 
 dp.adla p,o\vvrjrai. The conjec- 
 ture yevvaioraTov is quite un- 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 88 
 
 266. NE. 20. Ka$opa> Kai paX aToirtos tjvpfiaivov. 
 
 mE. TV cT ; ot)/c tf/co? varara a(\)LKveio-Qai tu. 
 (3pa8uraTa ; 
 
 NE. 20. Ncu, rouro ye. 
 
 37 E. Tooe »5e oi)/c ivvoovpev, cos eri yeXoioTepos 5 
 6 fiaaiAev? (patveTai pera rijs dyt/\r)$ IjvvSiaOc-'cov 
 kcu tjvvSpo/Jia TreTropevpLevos tco tcov dv8pcov av irpos 
 d rov ev)(€prj ft'iov aptcna yeyvpLva.crp.evco ; 
 
 NE. 20. na^raVa<7£ /xeV ovv. 
 
 37E. Nw yap, co ^coKpares, eKelvo Ictti Kara- 10 
 (paves p.dXXov to prjOev tot eV Trj irep). tov ao(pLCTTr)v 
 
 &Tr}CT€l. 
 
 called for. There is no real 
 difficulty in the coordination of 
 
 yevvaioraTO) with evxepeo-ri'iTcp, 
 
 and the echo in yevet yew. is 
 clearly intentional, as in 17 yevei 
 yewaia <ro(f)i(TTLKr]. The two are 
 thrown together by lot ; they 
 run a race together : which is 
 left behind 1 Clearly the slower 
 animal, the pig. But the race 
 between men and pigs involved 
 a still more ridiculous race be- 
 tween two sorts of men, the 
 king and the swineherd. Thus 
 his majesty is found contending 
 for sovereignty with one of his 
 flock (a phenomenon which will 
 be repeated presently, cf. 267 e), 
 and with one who has been most 
 perfectly trained to lead a life 
 of careless ease : Ulysses with 
 that opxa/ios avhpSiv Euroaeus. 
 
 6. pera rr/s dye\r)s] I. e. t£>v 
 dye\aia>v Tivi. Cf. Hipp. Maj. 
 288 d : ov ko/jl^-os dXAa avpepe- 
 tos. Illfr. 268 a: ov povov dye- 
 Xaiav dvdpdmatv dXka Kai rmv 
 apxovroov civt5)v. 
 
 That man should be the con- 
 gener of the pig is in keeping 
 
 with the humour of Theset. 
 
 l6l C : otl tvuvtcov xprjpdrav pe- 
 rpov eo-Tiv vs k.t.'K. And the 
 race between the king and the 
 swineherd recals another touch 
 of satire in the same dialogue, 
 
 (174 d) : ftacrikea eyKtopia£6pevov 
 
 OLOV (JVJ3u>Tt]U. 
 
 7. av] I. e. As the pig was 
 
 ev^eptaraTou tcov 0T)piu>v. 
 
 Tip. t. e. (3. yeyvp. is an OXy- 
 •moroil. For yeyvpvacrpevco irpos, 
 cf. Legg. i, 626 b : koXcqs ye & 
 £eve, (paivei poi yeyvpvdcrdai npos 
 to hieihe'vai to. Kprjrcov vopipa. 
 
 Compare with the preceding- 
 classification the fourfold divi- 
 sion of living creatures accord- 
 ing to the four elements in Tim. 
 
 40 a : pla pev ovpavitov 6eiov 
 yevos, ci\\r) 8e kttjvov Kai depo- 
 iropov, Tpirr) he evvbpbv eihos, 
 Tte^bv he Kai xepaalov reraprov. 
 
 10. Nvv yap] A collateral in- 
 ference is sometimes stated as 
 a cause, e. g. Gorg. 454 d : Aq- 
 
 \ov yap av otl ov tovtou eo~Tiv. 
 
 Badham would read ye apa in 
 all such cases. 
 
 11. ev Tt) — ^TTjaei] Soph. 
 
 run J 1. I i t • •! 
 
 11 tlic nice. 
 
 Man win-, 
 the 1 nil 
 ning ni.iti'li, 
 of course. 
 But tliis 
 Btrange 
 race be- 
 t w < in men 
 
 ami pig8 
 
 is accom- 
 panied by 
 
 one more 
 absurd, be- 
 tween the 
 king and 
 the swine- 
 herd, who, 
 of all his 
 subjects is 
 
34 
 
 IIAATONOS 
 
 most com- 
 pletely 
 trained to 
 
 a life of 
 careless 
 ease. 
 
 Certainly, 
 as was .said 
 this morn- 
 ing, Dialec- 
 tic prefers 
 truth to 
 dignity. 
 
 Now for 
 the shorter 
 way. 
 
 NE. 20. To TToiov ; p. 
 
 HE. 'Otl rf) Tota8e fieOoSo) row Xoycov ovre 
 aep,vorepov fiaXXov epeX-qaev ?) prj, tov re afxiKpo- 
 Tepov ov8ev r)Ti/xaK€ irpb tov /ue/^b^oy, del 8e ko.6 
 5 avTi)v Trepaivet TaXtjOecrTaTOV. 
 NE. 20. "Eoucev. 
 
 HE. OvKOVV fX€Ta TOVTO, "iVCL flT) fl€ (frOf}? epoj- 
 
 r-qaas ttjv fipa)(UT€pav 68hv rjrts tote rjv eVt tov tov 
 fiaaiAecos bpov, olvtos uoi irportpov eXdco ; e 
 
 io NE. 20. 20o6> ye. 
 
 HE. Aeyco 8rj 8elv Tore evOvs to ire^ov tco 8l7to8l 
 irpos [to] TeTpdirovv yivos Siaveificu, kclt&ovtcl 8e 
 
 TCLvOpteTTLVOV €Tl /JLOVCp TCp 7TTT}VCO ^VVElXtJ^O? T7]V 
 
 8nro8a dyeXrjv ttolXlv tco \jfi\cp kcu ra TTTEpo- 
 
 [c,(f)veL te'/jlveiv, Tp.rj6eicrr)s 8e avTrj? koll tot rf8r) ttjs 
 
 avdpomovopLiKrjs 8r)XcQ0Eio-r]? te\vyj9, (pEpovTa tov 
 
 227 b, where the spirit of scien- 
 tific method and that of satire 
 interpenetrate as they do here, 
 so that it can be hardly known 
 which of them is made the 
 vehicle of the other. 
 
 3. fj firj\ Sc. aep.vorepov. 
 
 II. tots evdvs to 7re£6v] It is 
 impossible to exj)lain this pas- 
 sage so as to acquit the Stran- 
 ger of inexactness. Either he 
 has forgotten that the class of 
 winged creatures was cut off 
 (264 e), or he purposely begins 
 the shorter path from an earlier 
 point than where he gave no- 
 tice of the existence of the two 
 ways. Pei-haps the words roVe 
 eZ6vs may imply this (cf. supr. 
 263 e). In any case the word 
 Tre(6v is used in a different sense 
 from that in which it occurs 
 above, where it was opposed to 
 
 the same nrrjva which it here 
 includes. Tre^o'v is therefore = 
 gr]po&aTiKnv, and opposed to 
 ewbpov, " on land," not " on the 
 ground," by an ambiguity like 
 that which belongs to the 
 same word when applied to 
 an armament. Cf. infr. 267 b: 
 TregovopiKov. This ambiguity 
 probably gives rise to the in- 
 exact reference. Compare Rep. 
 
 I, 354 : epneaovros av varepou 
 
 \6yov — where the theory spo- 
 ken of, although discussed later, 
 had been introduced before the 
 other. Soph. 223 d, 224 c : 
 pera^XrjTiKr]. Such slight inac- 
 curacies perhaps do not arise 
 from mere neglect : they are 
 caused by Plato's instinctive 
 avoidance of an over-exactness, 
 which would be unnatural in 
 conversation. 
 
nOAlTIKOS. 
 
 8fi 
 
 266. ttoXltlkov kcu fiaaiXiKov, oiov rjvio\ov eh avTi)v 
 ivcmjcravTa, TrapaSovvai ras Trjs iroXttos rjvias, coy 
 olKela? koll aura) tolvtt]? ovo-qs rrjs emo-Tr/pLr)?. 
 7. NE. 213. KaAcoy kol KaOairepei \peos ovreScoKas 
 p.01 tov Xoyov, irpoaOeis ti]v eKTpoir^v oiov tokov koll, 
 avairXrjpcDcras amov. 
 
 3?E. (fre'pe Srj, kcu ^vveipco/xev iiraveXOovres hri 
 rrjv dp^rjv /* e 'x/° f r ^ s> re ^ e ^7"^ tov Xoyov tov ovo- 
 /JLaro? rrjs tov ttoXltlkov Te^yr)^. 
 
 NE. 20. Ylctvv fiev ovv. 
 
 SE. T^y yvwo-TiKrjs to'lvvv liviO'Tr\p.r]<i rjfuv rjv 
 kclt dpxas pLepo? lirLTaKTLKOV tovtov 8e careLKacrOev 
 
 mid 
 
 Land-fl 
 
 lll.llriHll 
 
 have been 
 first divided 
 into biped 
 and quad- 
 ruped : 
 then bipedi 
 into fledged 
 and naked. 
 And, when 
 man bad 
 been thus 
 distin- 
 guished a - 
 
 (he Ii!j/C.i 
 
 implwme, 
 
 t tlie States- 
 man, as the 
 man -herd, 
 should have 
 been en- 
 trusted 
 
 1. oiov — iv(TTJ](TavT(i^ For the 
 two participles, cf. Protag. 328 
 c : e\0wv els lepoV, 6u,6o-as, ocrov 
 dv Cpf) a£ia elvai ra padrjpara, 
 to<tovtoi> KareSrjKfv. 
 
 2. Trapa8ovvtu — enio-Tr]pT]sj 
 " To give into his hands the 
 reins of the state, believing 
 that they are his, and that this 
 art belongs to him." (ravTr/s 
 
 SC. ttjs dvdpconovopiKrjs.) 
 
 g. 7TpOO~8e\s TT)V eKTpOTTTjv] Cf. 
 
 Legg.3, 683 a : vvv ovv 8tj toctov- 
 tov irXeoveKTovpev 777 nXdvy tov 
 Xoyov. 
 
 oiov tokov] " By way of in- 
 terest." Cf. Rep. 6, 507 a : (3ov- 
 
 Xoiprjv civ, einov, epe Te 8vvao~6ai 
 dno8ovvai feat vpds KopicraaBai^ 
 dXXd prj &>o-Trep vvv tovs tokovs 
 povov. tovtov 8e S17 ovv tov tokov 
 Te kcu eKyovov avTov tov dyadov 
 Kopio-aade. evXaj3elo-0e pevToi, prj 
 7777 e^anaTrja-co vpds, KLJ38r]Xov drro- 
 818011s tov Xoyov tov tokov. dva- 
 7r\r]pa>o~as avTov SC. tov Xoyov. 
 
 " Having given the tale in 
 full." Cf. Symp. 188 e: « n 
 
 H-eXnrov, dvcnrXrjpwcrai. The 
 
 " shorter path" might have 
 seemed too bare if given 
 alone. 
 
 7. &epe 8fj Ka\ £vvelpcopev] 
 
 " Come, now let us proceed to 
 link together." Cf. Soph. 224 
 
 d : 101 vvv avvaydycopev avTO. 
 
 For the idiomatic kcu, cf. Soph. 
 
 Aj. 803 : e'l Tco Ka\ Xcyi^eadai 
 a^oXr], 
 
 8. tov Xoyov tov ovopctTos] 
 " The definition of the name." 
 The words are emphatically 
 repeated in order to fami- 
 liarize the distinction between 
 Xo'-yos and ovopa. Cf. Soph. 218 
 C : Set 8e del navTos nepi to 
 irpdypa qvto pdXXov 8td Xoycov 
 r) Tovvopa povov avvopoXoyr)- 
 o~ao~6ai x^P 15 Xoyov. 
 
 1 2. dneiKaaBevj " Having been 
 illustrated by an analogy :" viz. 
 that of the avTonaXeis. Supr. 
 
 260 e : 17 fiovXei, KaQdirep elKa- 
 £opev vvv S17, Kat Tovvopa napeiKa- 
 (rcopev. Cf. Soph. 221 b: an 
 avrrjs Ttjs irpatjecos dqbopoicodev 
 Tovvopa. 
 
 F 2 
 
S6 
 
 IIAAT0N02 
 
 TO /JLOpiOV aVT€7TtTaKTLK(W tpprjOl], £(00Tp0(f)lKr) Se p. 
 TTOlXlV aVT€irLTaKTLKrj9 OV TO (TjllKpOTOLTOV tcov ytvoiv b 
 
 a7reo-^/^ero* kcu £ojoTpo(j)iKr)S ei8o? dyeXaiOTpocfjiKOi/, 
 ayeXaior po(j)LKOv <5' av ttc^ovojilkov. tov Se iretpvo- 
 
 5 flLKOV fldAlCTTa d7T€T€pi>€T0 TtyVT) TX]<i UKtpOLTOV (f)V- 
 CT6C09 OpeiTTLKT]. TaVTT)<? 8" CLV TO /JLtpO? OVK ekciTTOV 
 
 TptirXovv o~v/jL7rXeK€iv avayKouov, av ei? tv tls olvto 
 ovofia ^vvayayfiv (3ovXt]0fj, yevecrews *ap.iKTOv vopttv- 
 tiktjv* €7rio-Tr}/jLrji> irpoaayopevwv. to & carb tovtov 
 10 TprjpLa, eir) iroipLvr) 8l7to8l fie'pos dv6p(x)7rovopiLKbv eri c 
 XtKpOev fiovov, tovt avTO io~Tiv rjdr) to fyjTrjBev, ap.a 
 fiacrL\iKov tglvto kXyjOcv /ecu ttoXltlkov. 
 
 NE. 20. YlavTairaaL ptev ovv. 
 
 HE, 'Apd y, co Sco/cparfS", dXiqOcos rjpuv tovto, 
 
 267.2' 
 
 4. dyeXaiorpocpiKov S' av 
 7reCovofXiKov] Vid. supr. 264 e. 
 The gregarious were first di- 
 vided into land and water ani- 
 mals, and then land animals 
 into fledged and unfledged, to 
 Avhich latter the word ne(6v 
 was applied. These two steps 
 are here remembered as one 
 only: the second of the two 
 distinctions being dropped, and 
 the word 7re£oi> being under- 
 stood to mean " on land." This 
 confirms what has been said 
 above in the note on p. 
 266 d. 
 
 6. ovk eXaTTOv rpnrXovv] This 
 
 is the reading of ten MSS., 
 including the best, and is re- 
 presented in the version of 
 Ficinus, who probably joined 
 to [iepos ovk eXarrov (ov) (" par- 
 tem nequaquam minorem." Cf. 
 supr. ov to arp.iKpoTa.Tov tcov ye- 
 va>v), which, however, is in- 
 consistent with the context, 
 
 and hardly grammatical. It 
 seems most probable that we 
 have here an unusual construc- 
 tion, of which another instance 
 occurs in Legg. 12, 956 e: 
 v(pfjv 8e pi) nXeov i'pyov yvvaiKos 
 pias ep.p.r]vov, where there is no 
 difference of reading. Cf. supr. 
 265 c. Three MSS., H2Y, 
 have rpinXov, which Stallbaum 
 adopts. 
 
 8. For yeveaeas, cf. SUpr. 
 
 261 d, infr. 271 a. 
 
 MSS. fiiKTov vopevriKr/s. The 
 
 correction is due to Boeckh 
 and Heindorf. 
 
 10. em TTo'ipvrj 8l7to8i] This 
 is the point where the two 
 ways meet. " The art of man- 
 herding being the only portion 
 left which has to do with 
 bipeds." 
 
 11. ajia — ttoXltlk6v\ Accord- 
 ing to what was said at first : 
 259 c. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 87 
 
 267. KaOajrep av vvv elprjKas, ovtco? iar\ kui irtirpa- 
 ypcevov ; 
 
 NE. 20. To 7T010V $Y) ; 
 
 HE. To TravToaraaiv iKavco? eiprjadai to irpo- 
 TeOev. 7) tovt aura kcu paXiaTa ?} tyrrjcri? eXXei7rei, 5 
 to tov Xoyov elprjadai pcev wcos, ov prjv iravTairaaL 
 ye TeXecos careipydaOai ; 
 d NE. 20. rtwy ewres- ; 
 
 HE. 'Eyco &w Treipdo-opou tout avTO, o diavoov- 
 /LLai vvv eri fxaXXov SrjXcJocrca. IO 
 
 NE. 20. Aeyotf eu>. 
 
 HE. Ou/cow tcov vofievTLKwv rjplv woXXcov (pavei- 
 acov apTL Teyvwv put Tis rjv 1) ttoXltikt) kcu fuels 
 tivos dyeXi]$ eiripeXeia ; 
 
 NE. 20. Nat. I5 
 
 HE. TavTrjv 8e ye Sicopi^ev 6 Xoyos ov\ tirwcov 
 elvai Tpocpov ovd' aXXcov Orjplcov, aAA' dv6pco7rcov 
 
 KOlVOTpOfpLKTjV eiT LCTTY] prjV . 
 
 NE. 20. Ovrm. 
 
 But it is 
 not really 
 at an end. 
 
 For, when 
 the king is 
 designated 
 as the Man- 
 herd, it 
 must not 
 be forgot- 
 ten that he 
 
 I. KaBanep ov vvv ei'pijKas] Sc. 
 TrnvTcnra.cn. Cf. Soph. 2l8 a. 
 " Have we really (kcu) done as 
 you say 1 " 
 
 4. to rrpoTfdev] Cf. Soph. 2 1 8 
 e : tL BrjTa TrpoTCt^aiped' civ. 
 
 5. fj tovt avTO cnreipyao6ai\ 
 
 " Or is it in this very respect 
 that our inquiry is especially 
 defective, that the definition 
 has in a way been given, but 
 still has not entirely received 
 final completion 1 ?" Cf. infr. 
 
 277 b : d.Te)(va)s 6 Xdyos rjplv 
 
 coorrep £a>ov — tt]V ivdpyciav ovk 
 
 cnrfi\r](pevai tto). 
 
 9. vmv ] Dialectic makes 
 the subject of inquiry clearer 
 
 to both the minds which are 
 engaged. 
 
 Treipa.oop.ai. tovt a\)To\ " I 
 
 will endeavour to do this very 
 thing, to make my meaning 
 at this moment clearer for us 
 both." I. e. I will endeavour to 
 give my present thought, what 
 I desiderate for the main argu- 
 ment, a complete expression. 
 
 17. ovo' aXXcov 6T)p'ia)v\ He 
 
 falls back into the common 
 parlance for want of a col- 
 lective word to express "ani- 
 mals other than man." There 
 is less danger in this, now 
 that the requisite distinctions 
 have been made. 
 
riAATONOI 
 
 is unlike 
 other 
 herdsmen 
 in this, thai 
 he is not 
 alone in 
 feeding or 
 in tending 
 his flock, 
 
 but has 
 many com- 
 petitors, 
 such as the 
 merchant, 
 husband- 
 man, baker, 
 gymnast, 
 physician. 
 
 aR. To 8t) tow vofitaiv ttolvtojv 8id(j)opov> koll to p. 
 twv fiao-iAecov Oeaaco/xeOa. e 
 
 NE. 20. To ttoIov ; 
 
 SE. El' Ti$ tcov clWodv ro), Te'xvr)? a\Xr}9 ovopa 
 5 e\oou, KOivf) tyjs ayeXrjS ^vvTpotyos elvai (j)rjo-l koll 
 TrpocnroieiTai. 
 
 NE. 2D. Um 07/9 ; 
 
 SE. Giov 01 6fJL7TOpOL KOLL yecopyol KOLL CTlTOVpyOL 
 
 7rdi>Te?, koll irpos tovtols yvpLvaaTOLL koll to twv 
 ■olaTpwv yevos, olxrd* otl toIs nepl tol avOpocnrLva 
 i>oiJ.evcrLV, ovs ttoXltlkovs iKaXecrafiep, iravTOLTraorL 
 too Xoyco SiapLoixoLPT av ovtol avp,7rai>T€9, 00? afals p. 
 
 268 
 
 I. To 8r) tcov vupiiov\ It has 
 
 been assumed that the king is 
 a herdsman of men, but it is 
 now found necessary to distin- 
 guish the king from the herds- 
 man. In this curious form the 
 imperfect conditions of human 
 government are indicated. 
 
 7rdvT<ov~\ I.e. All beside the 
 king. 
 
 4. Ei' tis tcov oKXcov t<u] This 
 reading, which has been pre- 
 served in three or four MSS. 
 (rS B, no AFH, tco corr. n), 
 and would have been extremely 
 probable if due only to conjec- 
 ture, has been unaccountably 
 overlooked. to ciXXr/s rexvrjs 
 ovofia, if not a solecism, is 
 very harsh Greek, while to ttjs 
 aXkrjs t. (2Y), repeating the 
 article, has no meaning. Stall- 
 baum translates : " Num. quis 
 reliquorum alius artis nomen 
 gerens communiter gregis so- 
 cium sese esse et dicat et si- 
 mulat," and adds, that the 
 meaning of this ought to be 
 plain to all from what follows. 
 
 He probably means that the 
 king, unlike other artists (it 
 should be "herdsmen"), is not 
 distinguishable in some re- 
 spects when thus defined from 
 individuals amongst his flock 
 (the physician, gymnast, etc.). 
 He runs a race with them, as 
 he did with the swine-herd. 
 But this is an extremely 
 vague way of putting what is 
 presently explained. Whereas 
 the above reading makes all 
 clear. " I mean, whether in 
 the case of any of the other 
 herdsmen there be any one, 
 bearing the name of a differ- 
 ent art, who professes and pre- 
 tends to share in common with 
 him the tending of the herd." 
 
 5. gvvTpotfios is to be taken 
 actively, as appears from rijs 
 
 Tpo(prjs emp.e\ovvTas below, and 
 
 a-vvvoprji infr. 268 c. Cf. Legg. 
 8, 845 d : ovre yap yrjv ovre 
 i)\iov oifre irvevpaTa, rois vdaai 
 crvvTpocpa twv e/c yrjs dvaj3Xa(TTav- 
 
 OVT(OV. 
 
 12. tco Xoyco 8iap.dxoivT av] 
 
IIOAITIKOS. 
 
 $9 
 
 268. Trjs TpofyrjS tTUfieXoVVTOLL TYjS UV0[XOiriVT)9) OV fXOVOV 
 
 dyeXaiwv dvOpamuiv dXXa /cat ti]s tcou dpyovraw 
 avTcov ; 
 
 NE. 20. Ovkovv 6p0G)? av Xeyoiev ; 
 aE. 'Iotw?. /cat rouro //eV €7riaK€\j/6/ie0a, ro8e 8e5 
 Xapev, otl fiovKoXcp ye ovdei? d/JLCpiafir/TrjcreL irep\ 
 tovtcou ovftevos, aAA' auroy Trjs dyeXr]? rpo(f)os 6 
 /3ou0op/3oy, avrb? iarpos, avros olov vv/Kpevrrj^ /cat 
 b irep\ tovs rwv yiyvop.evoav tokovs /cat Aortas* p.ovos 
 hn(rrrj\x(xiv ttjs paLeuTLKrj?. en rolvvv irouftias /cat 10 
 IxovcriKrjs i(f) oaov avrov rd Ope/i/iara (pvaeL /jl€T€l- 
 Xr](f)ev, ovk dXAos KpeiTTcov TrapapvOelaOai /cat ktjXcov 
 TTpavvew, pLerd re opydvtov /cat ^tAw rc5 aTOfiarc r-qv 
 tyjs avrov Troipviqs dpiara pLerayeLpitpiievos p.oucriKrji>. 
 /cat 8rj /cat twv dXXwv irepi vofiecov 6 avros rpoiros. 15 
 
 v yap; 
 
 "Would contend in argument." 
 Cf. Theset. 1 60 e and note ; and 
 see \eyoiev infra. 
 
 (12.) ovtoi <xvyiTravT(s\ Pleo- 
 nastic resumption. 
 
 2. dycXalcov] Cf. SUpr. 260 C. 
 
 6. 13ovk6\co] So also Bodl., 
 omitting rw. For avros — avros, 
 cf. Rep. 2, 383 d. 
 
 9. rwv yiyvofjLevwv] u The off- 
 spring from time to time." 
 Cf. Thea?t. 1 60 e : fif) \d6r) i^a? 
 
 ovk d^iov ov rpocprjs to yiyvoftevop. 
 
 10. en roivvv] " Nay, even 
 beyond the sphere of the arts 
 which were mentioned as com- 
 peting with the king." 
 
 Traidias ku\ p-ovo-iKrjs] Music 
 and the arts generally are iro- 
 nically spoken of as a kind of 
 child's-play. Cf. Soph. 224 a, 
 234 a, b. The genitives are 
 suggested by emo-Trmcov, but as 
 
 Nut bo the 
 ox-herd, 
 who is suf- 
 ficient in 
 
 all things 
 for his 
 cattle, to 
 supply 
 their wants, 
 to heal 
 their sick- 
 nesses, to 
 attend 
 them in the 
 hour of 
 marriage 
 and of 
 childbirth. 
 He pro- 
 vides also 
 for their 
 amusement 
 by rustic 
 melodies, 
 
 the sentence proceeds are un- 
 derstood to be governed by 
 
 perei\Tj(pe. 
 
 II. airov tci dpcp/jara] " The 
 
 objects of his care." dpippara 
 has the common meaning of 
 " creatures" with an etymo- 
 logical association from the 
 verbal meaning, as the cattle 
 are viewed in relation to the 
 herdsman. 
 
 13. perd Te opydvcov kcu \j/i\u> 
 
 to> arop-aTi] The meaning of 
 y{/i\6s depends on that to which 
 it is opposed or correlative. In 
 Legg. 2, 669 d, instrumental 
 music without the voice is 
 
 spoken of as ^tXf? Kadapiaei re 
 
 kcu avXrjo-ei, and is strongly ob- 
 jected to : while Xo'yot \j/t\oi in 
 the same passage are words 
 without metre, or prose. 
 
 15. tcov n'AXcov Tre'pi vo/zeW] 
 
40 
 
 I1AAT0NO2 
 
 sung or 
 whistled, 
 or " attem- 
 pered tn 
 
 tin- oaten 
 Hut.." And 
 thus do all 
 herdsmen 
 pxcepl the 
 king of 
 men : who 
 cannot 
 therefore 
 be ade- 
 quately de- 
 fined until 
 we have 
 parted off 
 from him 
 this crowd 
 of rivals, 
 and set 
 him forth 
 alone and 
 clear. For 
 
 NE. 20. 'OpOorara. ]> 
 
 HE. rico? ovv i)fXLu u Xoyos 6p6o$ (j)avelTUL kou 
 UKepaio? 6 7repl tov /3acnAeW, otolv avrov vopcea kou 
 
 TpO(j)OU dytXrjS avOpGdTTLVriS 6£>ptV p.OVOV £KKplVOVT€S c 
 
 5 pvpcoov dXXcov dp(f)ta(3i]TovvTO)v ; 
 NE. 20. OvScLfim. 
 
 HE. Ovkovv opOcos oXiyov epurpocrOev e(J)ofir]Or}- 
 pev v7ro7TT6vaai>Te? per) Xtyovres pev rt Tvyyavoiptv 
 ayr]p.a fiaaiXiKOv, ov pi]v dneipyaG p.evoL ye elpev iron 
 ioSi aKpifielas tov woXltlkov, eco? av rovs 7T€piK€)(v- 
 pevovs olvtw kou tyjs avvvopjjs avrcp dvTLTroiovpevovs 
 7repteXoPT€9 kou yapiaavTes drr eKetvcov Kadapov 
 povov ovtov diro^vcopev ; 
 
 26h 
 
 Either nepl is pleonastic (ut 
 ssepe) or the genitive is to be 
 repeated with rponos. 
 
 3. aKepaios] " Perfect, with- 
 out a flaw." " How is our 
 definition not impaired by the 
 circumstance, — 1" Cf. Rep. 
 
 I, 342 b : d[3\afii)s kci\ anepaios 
 i(TTiv opQrj ovcra (17 Te^vrj), 
 
 4. povov eKKplvovTfs] Cf. infr. 
 303 b : ttuo~u>v yap eKelvrjv ye c'k- 
 Kpireov. 
 
 7. dXiyov eprrpoadev] 267 C, d. 
 e'(poj3T]dr]pev vnonTevaavTes] Cf. 
 
 Soph. 264 b. 
 
 9. o~xrjpa fiacrChiKov — St' anpi- 
 (3elas tov ttoXitikov] " The form 
 we described was indeed royal, 
 but did not accurately corre- 
 spond with that of the States- 
 man." It appears presently 
 that Ave have been imagining 
 the Divine Shepherd of the 
 people as he existed in the 
 golden age. 
 
 10. ivepiKexvpivovs] " Cl'OAvd- 
 ing in upon him." Compare 
 the description in the Gorgias, 
 
 p. 452 a, of the physician, the 
 gymnast, and the moneymaker 
 disputing the claim of the 
 rhetor to be the agent of the 
 greatest good for man. on croi 
 
 civt'ik av irapao-Taiev k.t.X. Also 
 
 ib. 456. A still nearer parallel 
 occurs in the sixth book of 
 the Republic, Avhere the true 
 philosophers are Avith difficulty 
 separated from the pretenders 
 to philosophy. Cf. esp. Rep. 
 6, 488 C : avToiis oe del tu vav- 
 Kkrjpa) 7iepiKCxyo-8ai oeopevovs 
 
 k.t.X. And see Ar. Pol. IV. 
 
 12 : "Eo-ti 8e ov8e tovto Stop'tacit. 
 pdoiov, Tvoias Set KaXt'iv dp%ds' noX- 
 Xaiv yap emaTarav rj itoXitiktj koi- 
 vwvia bevrai. 
 
 I I. ttjs o-vvvoprjs avTG> dvTinoi- 
 
 ovpevovs] avTa is partly the 
 ethical dative, and partly go- 
 verned by ovv : " claiming to 
 share AA r ith him the task of 
 tending the herd." 
 
 I 2. Kadapov povov] " Alone 
 
 and clear." Cf. infr. 303 d, e, 
 304 a. 
 
 
nOAITIK02. 
 
 4J 
 
 268. NE. 20. 'OpOorara p.ev ovv. 
 
 SE. ToDro roivuv, co ^coKpares, rjfxtv ttou]T€ov, el 
 /j.7] pLeAAoifieis eVl tcq reXet KaTaicrxyvou tov \6yov. 
 
 NE. 20. 'AAAa pcr]v ov8apLu>9 tovto ye Spaareou. 
 
 SE. ITaA^ to'lvvv e'tj a'AAr?? apx>J? &i ko.8' irepav 
 68oi> Tropev6i]vat riva. 
 
 NE. 20. rioiW 577 ; 
 
 aE. ^ythov iraihiav eyKepaaapievovs' av^yw yap 
 
 fxepei del fxeyaXov fivOov 7rpoa-)(p^craadai, kcu to 
 
 Xolttov Srj, Kaddirep eV toI? TrpocrOev, fie'po? del fie'povs 
 
 e dcpaipovpLtvovs eV axpov d(piKi>€io-6ou to {rjTovp.tvov. 
 
 ovkovv XPV 5 
 
 NE. 20. Haw fxev ovv. 
 
 tins pur- 
 po e wt 
 mu.s!, bej in 
 afresh 
 travel by 
 a different 
 way 
 
 ing our dis- 
 5 cussion 
 with an an- 
 cient tale, 
 before we 
 resume our 
 
 of 
 divisions, 
 
 and con- 
 tinue them 
 until we 
 10 read) t he 
 desired 
 summit. 
 
 2. (I (ir) fieWoifiev] " Un- 
 less we were to — as we feared 
 we should if we neglected this." 
 The optative may be defended 
 by supposing an attraction from 
 the preceding optatives : the 
 past tense being continued in 
 thought. But it is equally pos- 
 sible that this attraction (from 
 Tvyxdvoifiev) may have influ- 
 enced the scribes. Ast and 
 
 Stallb. COirj. peWopev. 
 
 5. i£ ciXXrjs dpx^s — nad* ere- 
 
 pav 686p] " From a fresh start- 
 ing-point, and by another road," 
 i. e. approaching the subject 
 from a different side. The 
 myth which follows, like the 
 digression in the Thepetetus, 
 affords a rest after the thorny 
 path which has been trodden, 
 and also presents a deeper and 
 more religious aspect of the 
 question. Cf. Prot. 317c: 17 
 
 avrr] pot apx*] eariv — ij^rep cipri. 
 
 Arist. Eth. Nic. VII. 1, § 1 : 
 
 aWrjv TTOirjcrapivov; dpxrp>. 
 
 8, <TV\vto yap pepei 8ei peydXov 
 
 pvBav npoo-xp.] " We must call 
 in aid a large portion of a great 
 cycle of mythology." The fables 
 quoted are viewed as fragments 
 of a larger whole, some part of 
 which is narrated, and part of 
 what is narrated is applied to 
 the purpose of the dialogue. 
 Cf. Legg. 4, 713 a : 5 Ap' ovv 
 pv6a> crpiKpd y en 77poaxpf]o~Teou, 
 ei peWopev eppe\a><: 7rcos 8t]Xa>- 
 crat to vvv iparcopevov j 
 
 10. pe'pos — {jjTovpevov] Com- 
 pare Bacon, Nov. Org. II. 16 : 
 " Turn vero post rejectionem 
 et exclusivam debitis modis 
 factam, secundo loco, tanquam 
 in fundo, manebit — forma affir- 
 mativa, solicla, et vera, et bene 
 terminata." 
 
 I I . en (inpov drpinvelrrdai. to £.] 
 
 " To arrive at the object of our 
 search, as it were to the sum- 
 mit of a steep ascent." Cf. 
 
 Rep. 7 j 5 I 5 e • &ia rpa^fi'ay rr/s 
 di'afBdaecos ko.1 dvdvTovs. T;ie 
 mountain-path (aTpanos) is kept 
 with difficulty. 
 
42 
 
 OAATONOS 
 
 HE. 'AAAa 8r) tu> /ivdcp fjiov irdvv irpocreye rov p. 268 1'" 
 vovv, KaOanep 01 7rat<5es" ttolvtias ov ttoXXo. eK(f)evy€i$ 
 7raf5i«y errf. 
 
 NE. 20. Aeyoi? av. 
 
 j SE. 'H^ TOLVVV KCU €Tl t<TTO.l TWV irdXai \z\6eV- 
 
 rcov ttoXXol re aAAa /cat £7) zeal to 7re/)t t^j/ 
 'Arpecos re /cat ©ueoToi; Xe^Oetcrav epiv (pda-fxa. 
 a/o;/coa? yap 7roi> /cat a7rofir)/ioi>€veis- 6 (paai yeve- 
 adai Tore. 
 
 1. 'AAAa 817 tu> pv8a> — KaGinrep 
 oJ 7ra75es] Cf. Soph. 224 d : 
 pvdov — iraiaiv as oiktiv fjplv. So 
 the myth in the Phsedrus is said 
 7rotSm TvenaLadai. Phsedr. 265 d. 
 
 2. Tvavrcoa — er^] " You are 
 not many years escaped from 
 play." Cf. supr. d, iraibidv. Ste- 
 phanus (anticipated Ly a few 
 MSS.) raised a doubt about 
 the accent, and read 7rai8las : 
 
 864 d 
 
 naiSi 
 
 9, 004 CI : t) Traioia xP co l Jievos j 
 oii8e 7TG) tu>v tolovtcov hiacpepav. 
 
 He has been followed by some 
 editors, who translate Traibias 
 err/ " years of childhood." 
 Stallbaum justly replies tbat 
 " 3'ears of child's-play" would 
 only be a more graceful way 
 of saying the same thing. 
 But he errs with the rest in 
 joining Trai8ias with em, al- 
 though he sees that with this 
 rendering noKv is required 
 instead of noWd. The present 
 is only one of numberless in- 
 stances of hyperbaton which 
 occur in these dialogues. Cf. 
 Soph. 235a: on tbi/ rrjs naidias 
 perexovrmv itrri ris uepcov. The 
 
 genitive in the MS. reading, 
 7rai8ias t is, however, ambiguous, 
 and I have ventured to intro- 
 
 duce the plural natBid^, which 
 exactly suits the context, and 
 occurs several times in the 
 Laws. Cf. Ar. Pol. VIII. 2 : 
 Ata tovto Bel naidias eladyeo-dai 
 Kciipocpv\nKovvTas rfjv XP1 <TLU } <*> s 
 Trpoadyovras qbnppaKelas X^P tv ' 
 avecris yap 77 toicivti) kIvt]<tis rrjs 
 ijfVXVS) KaL $ la T h v ^ovyjv dvd- 
 
 iravo-is. The word (in common 
 with many others) has no ac- 
 cent in the Bodleian MS. 
 
 5. 'Hv tolvvv kciI en eorai] 
 Cf. Thucyd. I. 22 : rav yevopevuv 
 ■ — kcu — peWovreov -rrore ctvdis ecr- 
 
 fo-dai. " There really happened, 
 and shall hereafter happen 
 again, like many other things 
 of which ancient tradition has 
 preserved the record, the por- 
 tent which appeared in con- 
 nexion with the legendary 
 sti'ife of Atreus with Thyestes." 
 The word %», like " once upon 
 a time," marks the beginning 
 of a tale. (Phaadr. 237 a.) Cf. 
 Tim. p. 2 2 C : TroWal ml Kara 
 TToXXd <p0opai yeydvacnv kcu en 
 ecrovTai. 
 
 7. (pdcrua) "A sudden, un- 
 expected sight." Soph. Track 
 
 508 : rerpaopov cpdcrpa raupov. 
 Cf. Theset. 155 a: ri nor eorl 
 ravra ret cpdvpara ev rjp'iv. 
 
I10AITIK02. 
 
 43 
 
 268. NE. 212. To irepl tv) 1 ? xf JV(T V s ' &PVQS "was arj- 
 \xC10v <fipa(JEis. 
 
 1. arjfiflov] The form of 
 the story to which Plato al- 
 ludcs appears to be the same 
 which is given in one of the 
 scholia on Enrip. Or. 988 : 
 " Hermes revenged the death 
 of Myrtilus, his son, upon the 
 Pelopidse, by causing a golden- 
 fleeced lamb to be born amongst 
 the flocks of Atreus. When 
 his claim to the succession was 
 disputed, Atreus promised to 
 display the prodigy in proof 
 that the gods favoured his 
 right. Thyestes persuaded 
 Aerope, the wife of Atreus, to 
 give him the lamb : whence 
 Atreus was in danger of losing 
 the kingdom, had not Zeus, 
 who upheld his claim, made 
 the sun and the Pleiads to 
 return from their setting to- 
 wards their rising." It is clear 
 from this in what sense the 
 lamb is called a " sign" or 
 " token" (a-rjuelov) : and how 
 the greater portent was given 
 by the god " in bearing witness 
 
 to Atreus" {y.aprvpr]0-as 6 6ebs 
 
 'Arpet). The notion that " the 
 sun in horror turned his face 
 from the scene" (also men- 
 tioned in the Scholia to Eurip- 
 ides, and frequently alluded to 
 in the tragedies of Seneca : 
 see also Hygin. Fab. 88, 258), 
 although the most commonly 
 received, appears to be one of 
 several rationalizing interpre- 
 tations of the fable. The lines 
 of Euripides should be quoted 
 here : — 
 
 bdev 86poio~i rols e'/xois 
 ^Ad' apa noXiHTTovos 
 MaidSos t6kov, 
 to xpvaofxciWov upvus oiror 
 
 iyiv€TO re'piis oXobu 6\o6v 
 
 Xo^evfia iroipvLOKTiu 
 
 'Arp/oy 'nnroftuTa' 
 o6cv epis to Te TTTfpuiTOV 
 aXlov p.(Ttfiakiv apfMu 
 Titv jrpos urntpav Kt\ev6ov 
 ovpavov pedappuo'ao'a 
 povoiicoKov es ua>, 
 €TTTim6pov Te Spoprjpa TL\(iu8os,' 
 ety 68bv uX\av Zevs /xern/3uAAet. 
 
 See also ejusd. El. 734, where 
 the truth of the same legend 
 is questioned. The " golden 
 lamb" seems to have been 
 known, with variations, to the 
 author of the cyclic poem 
 Alcmreonis and to Pherecydes 
 (Schol. in Eur. loc. cit.), but 
 it is difficult not to connect 
 the other portent, as well as 
 the revolution imagined by 
 Plato, with the tale told to 
 Herodotus by the Egyptian 
 priests, " that in the course 
 of the 11,340 years during 
 which Egypt had been a 
 monarchy, there had been 
 no god in human shape ; but 
 the sun had reversed his 
 course four times, and that 
 without any convulsions of na- 
 ture in the land of Egypt. 
 To which they added, that 
 before the 11,340 years gods 
 had ruled in Egypt, one of 
 whom had been at each time 
 supreme : of whom Orus, the 
 son of Osiris, was the last." 
 Hdt. II. cc, 142, 144. There 
 is no ground, however, for sup- 
 posing, as Boeckh (Philol. p, 
 1 18) at one time imagined, that 
 the Egyptians had anticipated 
 (through the study of their 
 own monuments) the scientific 
 theory of the precession of 
 
 G 2 
 
44 
 
 IIAAT0NQ2 
 
 HE. OuSa/im, dXXa to irepl tyj? peTaPoXrjs 8v- p. 
 (jecoy re kgu di'aroXrj? rjXlov koll t(du aXXwv acrrpcov, 
 cos dpa oOev p.ev dvareXXeL vvv, el? tovtov Tore tov 
 tottov tSvero, dveTeXXe 8' €/c tov evavTLOv, Tore be 8i] 
 i fiapTvp-qaas dpa 6 Oebs 'At pel fieTefiaXev avTO eiri to 
 vvv o~yr\\ia. 
 
 NE. 20. Aeyerai yap ovv brj koll tovto. 
 
 HE. Kat fjLrjv av koll ty]v ye fiao-Cheiav rjv f)pf;€ 
 Kpovo? 7roXXcov aKrjKoapev. 
 > NE. 20. YlXelcrTcov lieu ovv. 
 
 HE. Tt be ; to rot*? epnrpocrQev (pveaOaL yrjyevels b 
 Kat /a?) €^ aAA^Aeoy yevvdaOaL ; 
 
 2 6 9 | 
 
 the equinoxes. The reason 
 advanced by Plato himself may 
 possibly have given rise to the 
 fancy in the first instance. 
 " All that is visible must suffer 
 change." Compare Seneca, Ep. 
 71. § 11 : "Quid enim ruuta- 
 tionis periculo exceptum % Non 
 terra, non ccelum, non totus 
 hie rerum omnium contextus, 
 quamvis Deo agente ducatur. 
 Non semper tenebit hunc or- 
 dinem, sed ilium ex hoc cursu 
 aliquis dies dejiciet." 
 
 (2.) <ppd&is\ " Your words 
 import, perchance, the token 
 which depended on the golden 
 lamb." 
 
 2. tS)V ciXXcov aarpcovj The 
 
 Pleiades are mentioned in the 
 story. 
 
 3. coy apa — to vvv axr/pa] 
 
 Plato here improves upon the 
 original legend, in which the 
 sun only changed his course 
 for a single day. 
 
 5. avr6~] The rising and set- 
 ting of the sun and stars con- 
 sidered as one phenomenon. 
 
 8. Kat p.r)v av~] As in the 
 
 Theastetus three different 
 theories, so here three distinct 
 fables are woven together. 
 
 fjv rjpije Kpovos^ Familiar 
 to the Greek mind from the 
 poem of Hesiod, perhaps also 
 from the Orphic hymns, and 
 celebrated in the festival of the 
 KpoW. The lines from the' Works 
 and Days' seem to have been 
 present to Plato's mind, 111- 
 12 2: oi pev iici Kpovov rjcrav, or' 
 ovpava ep.(3ao-i\eveV | coy Se deol 
 £a>eo-Kov, aKrjBea Bvpbv fyovTes, | 
 voacpiv cirep re ttovcov *cat ol£vos" 
 ov8e ti 8eiX6v I yqpas eTTrjv, atei oe 
 7rdSas Kat xelpas opoloi TepirovT 
 iv QaKirjcri, kcikcov eKToadev dirdv- 
 Tcof" I dvrjaKov S' as vnvco fiefitt/;- 
 fievoi' eadXd Se Tvdvra | rolcriv etjV 
 Kapnov 8' i'epepe £el8a>pos apovpa \ 
 avTopdrrj noXXov re *cat a<pffovoV 
 01 8' edeXrjpol | ^crv^oi epya vi- 
 povro vvv io-ffkoiaiv noXeeaaiV | 
 axiTap €7rei8r] tovto yevos Kara 
 yaia KaXvfyev, to\ fiev 8aipove's 
 ettri At6y peydXov 8id (3ov\as, | 
 eadXol iiri)(66vioi, (pvXaKes 6vq- 
 Tav dvBpmncov. 
 
 1 1, tovs epTvpoadev (pveoScu yrj- 
 
riOAITIKOS. 
 
 269. NE. 20. Keel tovto eu TU>U TTaXai XtyOtVTWV . 
 
 HE. TaOra tolvvv tcrri pev ^vpiravTa Ik tqlvtov 
 irdOovs, Kol irpbs tovtol? erepa fivpla koll tovtcou ert 
 Oau/jLaarorepa, Scot 8e ^povov ttAtjOo? ra pev avrwv 
 a.7rea(3r]K€, to. 8e bito-ira.pp.eva elprjTou x^P^ ^cacrra 
 c got a.XXrjXcoi'. o 5' earl Tvacn tovtois airiov to ird- 
 609, ovSeh eiprjKe, vvv 8e 8rj Ae/creW* ei? yap ttjv tov 
 fiacriXeco? dirofteL^iv 7rpe\j/€L pi-jOev. 
 
 NE. 20. KaAAicrr' etVe?, kol Xeye pLrjSev iXXel- 
 
 7TC0U. 
 
 HE. ' Akovol? av. to ydp irav ToSe tote p.ev avTOs 
 6 6eos £vp.7ro8riyei 7ropw6p.evov kol avyKvKXel, tote 8" 
 
 and, onoe 
 more, how 
 
 there were 
 giants in 
 1 ili I days, 
 the off 
 Bpring of 
 the Earth. 
 
 yevtls] " That the earlier race of 
 men had their generation from 
 Earth." Plato is fond of this no- 
 tion, which, as usual, he colours 
 variously with his own imagina- 
 tion. Cf.Symp. 1 90 b, 1 9 1 c ; Rep. 
 3,414; Soph. 248 c;Prot.320c; 
 Tim. 23 e; Critias 109 c. The 
 fable spoke simply of earth-born 
 men. Plato finds in this a hint 
 for his " Phoenician" tale of an 
 earlier and more perfect mode 
 of generation. He seems to 
 blend together Hesiod's children 
 of the earth and the army of 
 Cadmus. See also Ar. Pol. I. 5 : 
 row? 7rpd>Tovs, eire yrjyeve'is r/crav, 
 eire in (pQopas Tivbs iaoodrjo-av. 
 
 2. ek ravTov ira6ovi\ " These 
 all arise out of one and the same 
 occurrence" (viz. the reversal 
 of the motion of the Cosmos). 
 
 4. 81a be xpovov nXr/dos] Com- 
 pare the way in which proba- 
 bility is given to the myth of 
 Atlantis in Tim. 2 1 d : 81a, 8e 
 
 Xpovov Kai (pdopav tu>v ipyao-api- 
 vav ov dirjpneae 8evpo 6 Xoyos. 
 
 5. 8ie<nrapp.eva] As in the 
 
 case of the three or four fables 
 
 These scat- 
 tered frag- 
 ments of 
 tradition 
 arise from 
 one and 
 the same 
 circum- 
 10 stance. 
 The uni- 
 verse is at 
 one time 
 turned by 
 
 to which allusion is made. 
 
 6. to TraOos] The article is 
 used because of tqvtov nddovs 
 preceding. 
 
 8. irpfyei pr^Biv] " The tell- 
 ing will be finely suited to our 
 object of displaying the nature 
 of the king." 
 
 11. to — irav robe] " This 
 
 universe." As in Tim. 29 e : 
 
 yevecriv kol to nau To8e. 
 
 avros 6 8e6s] The mono- 
 theism of this passage is more 
 express than that of the Ti- 
 meeus. (Cf. infr. 271 d.) Or 
 the article may be accounted 
 for by supposing the Timajus 
 already written. 
 
 12. gvp-nodriye 1 ] The WOl'd 
 
 7roS?7-ya) (to guide) occurs only 
 here and in Legg. 10, 899 a 
 (of the spirit which determines 
 the motion of the sun), gvp.- 
 
 nobr/yel iropevopevov <a\ o-vyKV<\(l 
 
 = " assists with his guidance as 
 it moves and helps to roll the 
 circling sphere." The universe 
 has an independent principle 
 of motion, which, however, 
 during the better cycle, is di- 
 
46 
 
 IIAATGN02 
 
 (iotl, but 
 at certain 
 periods ie 
 relinquish- 
 ed by him, 
 and turns 
 itself in the 
 opposite 
 direction. 
 
 For none 
 but the 
 mostDivine 
 
 things are 
 without 
 change. 
 But the 
 universe, 
 being vi- 
 sible, is of 
 a lower 
 
 dfl]K€V, OTOLV a'l TTfploSot TOV 7TpO(Tr)KOPTOS a\JTW fJ.(- 
 
 rpov e\Xr)(j)u>aLv r)8ij xpovov, to Se irakiv avTopurov 
 6£9 ravavrla irepidyeTai, foois ov koll typovqcnv elXrj- 
 \09 e/c tov o-vvappoaavTO? amo kot dpyas. tovto 8e 
 5 avTW, to dvdiraXiv Uvoll, did to?) i$j dvdyKr]? tptyvTOV 
 yeyovev. 
 
 NE. 212. Aid. to irolov 8-q ; 
 
 HE. To kclto. Tama kol coaavTois ^X iLV " 6 * KaL 
 TavTov elvai toTs iravTcov OeioTaTOi? TrpocrrjKet povoi>>, 
 io acopaTos 8e (})vo-ls ov TavTrj? ttjs Tafjecos. ov <5e ov- 
 pavov Ka\ Koapov iwcovop-aKapev, iroXXwv pev K.a\ 
 paKaplcov irapd tov yevvrjaavTO? peTelXrjfav, d\dp 
 ovv 8rj K€koli>(oi>7]K€ ye kou crcopaTO?. oOev avTa> pe- 
 
 p. 265 , 
 
 rected and impelled by God. 
 Cf. the interpretation of Hera- 
 clitus by Mn. Gaz. (quoted by 
 Lassalle, I. 124) : 'E^el KapaTos 
 (ivtt) (rfj ijfvxf]} ru 8rjpLovpyS 
 crvveneadai Kai avco peTa tov deov 
 rdSe to irdv avpnepnroXew Kai in' 
 eKelvov Terdxdai Kai apxecrBai, $ la 
 tovto tjj tov rjpepelv imdvpiq Kai 
 apXTJs eXnidi Kara (prjo-l rrjv ^'xh v 
 (pepeo-Qai. 
 
 i. avrjKev] The poetical aor- 
 ist, used because a point of 
 time is spoken of. Cf. Theset. 
 150 C : paieveo-Bat. pe 6 6eos 
 dvayKa£ei, yevvqv be dneKa\vo-ev. 
 
 orav — xp° vov ] " When the 
 number of revolutions which 
 make up the time appointed 
 for the world have now reached 
 their consummation. " Note 
 the hyperbaton of xP° vnv i an ^ 
 compare the " number of the 
 state" in Kep. 8, 546, esp. the 
 
 Words orav nepiTponal eKacTTOis 
 kvkXwv Trepiq K )opa<; tjvvdnTcoo-t. 
 
 2. to 8e~\ Sc. to nav To8e. 
 
 3. &ov t>v] This is added 
 
 to explain avropaTov. Compare 
 Tim. 30 b : vovv pev ev yj/vxf}, 
 y i /v Xl v °^ * v ~<*>l J - aTl £vvicTTas to 
 7rav £vveTfKTaLveT0 — ovtcqs ovv 
 8rj — 8el Xeyeiv Tov8e tov Kocrpov 
 £a>ov epy\rvxov evvovv re Tjj 11X77- 
 6eiq 81a ttjv tov 6eov yeveo~8ai 
 irpovoiav. 
 
 Kai (ppovrjo-iv ] Cf. Soph. 248 e: 
 pr]8e £jjv aiiTO pr]8e (ppoveiv ' 
 
 10. oh — ru^ewy] "Is of a dif- 
 ferent order." Cf. Phileb. 49 c: 
 
 f] 8e do-0evT]s (ciyvoia) rjplv tt/v twv 
 yeXoiav rjp'iv e'iXrjxe Ta^iv re Kai 
 (pvaiv. 
 
 ovpavbv Kai Koapov] Cf. Phaedr. 
 245 e : ivavra re ovpavov rrao-dv 
 re ye'veo-iv. 
 
 12. Trapa tov yevvrjo-avTos] Cf. 
 Tim. 37 C : 6 yevvrjo-as iraTTjp. 
 
 drhp ovv — o-capaTos] In the 
 Timseus also the body is the 
 source of all imperfection, 86 b: 
 
 to. 8e 7Tepl \j/vx^]V (vocrrjpaTa) 8ta 
 cruipaTos e£iv T0id8e. 
 
 13. Kai o-vpaTos] Cf. Tim. 
 32 c: o-oopaToei8es 8e 8r] — Set to 
 yevopevov eivai. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 47 
 
 269. rafioArjs d/jLolpcp yiyvtadai 8td iravrhs ol8vvoltov, Kara 
 bvvajiLV ye {11)1/ o ti /mAiara ev rw aura) kutoc ravra 
 fitau (f)opau KLveLTai' 810 rr\v <xvaKVK.Xr]crLV e\Ar)yev, o 
 TL a/ALKpOTCLTr)!/ Tr}$ ^CLVTOV^ KU>r)(T€(0? 7rapdAAa£iv. 
 
 grade. Y<-t 
 it lias the 
 least possi- 
 ble change 
 of motion, 
 when the 
 direction 
 of its rota- 
 
 auro 8e eavro crTpe(peii> aei crye8ov ov8evi 8vvoltov 5 tion ia re- 
 
 \ / 9 / t / versed. 
 
 ttXtjv tco T03V KLVovfievcov av ttolvtcov r)yovp.evcp. KL- Nowitcan- 
 
 I. Kara bvvap.iv ye pijv — Kivei- 
 rai] Compare Laws 7, 821 c, d, 
 where it is said to be impious 
 to attribute an inconstant mo- 
 tion to the sun, moon, and 
 planets. So in the Timseus 
 (p. 37) Time is created in 
 order to bring the creature 
 as near as possible to the Eter- 
 nal archetype. 
 
 3 . 816 — rrapaXkagiv] Only 
 the most Divine things can 
 be always alike. The Uni- 
 verse, having a body, must 
 suffer change. It moves as 
 nearly as possible always in the 
 same way (but cannot attain 
 perfectly even to this) : "Where- 
 fore it hath allotted to it a 
 reverse revolution, as the least 
 possible alteration of its mo- 
 tion." The reasoning would be 
 more complete if for avrov we 
 might read tciutoG. Of. Tim. 36 
 d, 39b, C. avaKvKKrjatv = to avaira- 
 \iv Uvat supr. This meaning is 
 required by the context here 
 and in Rep. 10, 617 b, eVara/cv- 
 
 Kkovjxevov : Tim. 40 C, enavanv- 
 KXrjaeis : lb. 37 a, dvaKVK\ovpevr] ; 
 
 in all which places a retrograde 
 motion is in question. The force 
 of the preposition seems to have 
 been lost in the use of the word 
 by later writers. A homely il- 
 lustration of Plato's meaning 
 may be taken from the game 
 of cup and ball : in which, in 
 order to ensure a steady mo- 
 
 tion, the ball is spun from 
 right to left, and the player 
 waits until it has begun to re- 
 volve in the opposite direc- 
 tion. The resilience of the 
 string, which is the cause of 
 this, would correspond to the 
 blind impulse (gvpepwos eVi- 
 Bvpla) which makes the uni- 
 verse rebound. 
 
 6. TOiu Kivovpevcov av iravTMV 
 ijyovfievf ] The language of 
 Plato respecting the relation 
 of the individual to the uni- 
 versal soul is not consistent. 
 In the Tima^us the former is 
 a " particle" taken from the 
 latter. In the Republic and 
 Phsedrus, and less clearly in 
 the Phsedo, the individual per- 
 sonality of each soul is re- 
 cognized. Yet in the passage 
 of the Phsedrus there are some 
 expressions in which the na- 
 ture of the soul is generalized. 
 Cf. also Legg. 10, 894 c : ra>v 
 
 8t) 8eKa paXicrra rjplv KivrjO-eav 
 t'iv av TrpoKpivaipev opdorara 
 naacov eppcopeveo-TaTrjv re eivai 
 na\ npaKTtKTjv biacpepovrois ; Mv- 
 p'ua avdyicq nov Siacpepeiv ttjv 
 avn)v avTTjv bwapevr/v Kivelv. lb. 
 12, 966 e: 6 irep\ ttjv \}/v)(f]u 
 ekeyopev, coy TrpeafivTarov re Ka\ 
 deioTarov ecrrt iravroiv gov kivtjctis 
 yeveaiv irapakafiovcra. aevaov ov- 
 aiav enopLO-ev. 
 
 av implies a contrast be- 
 tween the divinest of all things 
 
48 
 
 nAAT0NQ2 
 
 ooj ill. . -. e 
 itself al- 
 ways : for 
 
 that is the 
 
 pi i\ Liege 
 of mind. 
 
 Nor can 
 mind ori. 
 ginate 
 
 opposite 
 move- 
 ments. 
 Hence the 
 universe is 
 not always 
 
 veiv 8e tovtco rare yueV aAAcos", avQis Be ii/aurlco? ov p 
 Oe'pi?. e/c TrduTOiV 8r] tovtgl>i> top Kocrpov prjTe abrov 
 \pi] (fyavai aTpe(j)(ii> eavrov del, fxr/T av 6\ov del viro 
 Oeov arpec^eaOai Slttol^ koL ivavrias irepiayoiyds, prjr 
 sav Suo rive Oeco (j)povovi>T€ eavrol? ivavrla or ptfaiv p 
 olvtov, dkX, 07T€p dpn lppi-]6r) kol povov Xonrov, tote 
 pev vir dXXrjS tTvpiroSrjyeio-Oai Oela? airla?, to {tjv 
 irdXtv e7TLKT(£>pevov koll XapfidvovTa dOavaariav iin- 
 
 and the leader of all that is 
 in motion. As the former 
 alone can remain always the 
 same, so the latter alone can 
 revolve spontaneously for ever. 
 The phraseology recals 
 Phsedr. 245 c, where there is 
 a similar appearance of demon- 
 stration. See esp. the words 
 
 ak\a kcll toIs aAAotj oaa Kivelrai 
 tovto Trrjyrj Kai apxi Kivrjcreco^. 
 
 A comparison of the above 
 passages leaves little doubt that 
 by the Leader of Motion 
 here is meant Pure Soul in 
 general, of which the Deity, 
 who sustains the universe, is 
 a particular example. The 
 doctrine of the multiplicity 
 of independent souls (Rep. 10, 
 611 a) is here left out of view. 
 The argument may be thus 
 stated. All that is bodily 
 must suffer change. The Uni- 
 verse suffers the least possible 
 change (or " diverges least from 
 the motion of the same") in 
 revolving on an axis in one 
 plane opposite ways alter- 
 nately. But the Universe can- 
 not always be the cause of its 
 own motion : only Pure Soul 
 moves spontaneously for ever. 
 Nor can Soul be the cause of 
 diverse and opposite motions. 
 Hence the mighty fabric is not 
 
 self-moved always, nor always 
 moved by God : nor by two 
 Gods alternately, for, as before 
 stated, spirit cannot be op- 
 posed to spirit. There re- 
 mains only the case which has 
 been given. 
 
 7. to (r\v "nakiv e7riKTa>fifvov] 
 " Receiving a new influx of 
 life." 
 
 8. \afjLJ3dvovTa ddavaaiav iiri- 
 o-K(vao-TX]v ] The world re- 
 news her immortality, which 
 she receives afresh from her 
 Creator's hand. imo-Kevao-T^v 
 
 = repaired, refitted. The 
 word is omitted in Ast's Lexi- 
 con (edition of 1835). Of. 
 Legg. 5, 738 b: ovt av Kaivrjv 
 e'| dpxijs T '£ irotfj ovt av TraXaiav 
 8i€(p6apptvrjv emo~Kevd£rjTai (jro- 
 
 Xti/). The World grown old, 
 like Milton's hermit-soul, now 
 " Prunes her feathers and lets go 
 her wings," 
 
 which, in following her own 
 blind will, 
 
 " Were all-to ruffled and some- 
 times impaired." 
 
 ddavaaiav] Not merely ex- 
 emption from death, but good- 
 ness, the one immortal thing. 
 Cf. Legg. 4, 7 J 3 e: ° <T0V * v 
 rjplv ddavaaias eveo~Ti, tovtu nei- 
 dopevovs. 
 
 ddavaatav — napa tov fypi- 
 
riOAITIKOS. 
 
 49 
 
 70. o-KevacTTrju irapa tov Syfiiovpyov, TOTr7F^ihm*~x/a>€0r}, Batt-moredj 
 
 *> « v » v ,/ v v >, /)/ ^^^ uor moved 
 
 Ot eavrov avrov tei/at, Kara Kaipov acpet/evTa tolovtov opposite 
 
 &>crre avaTraXtv iropeveaOau 7ro\\as irepi6bu>v pivpi- either i>y 
 
 /« is > v / * v , / » v one Deity 
 
 aoay ow to \xeyunov ov kcll i(roppo7rcoTaToi> dirt or more 
 
 / ~ «,% 5 / than one, 
 
 apLLKpOTOLTOV pOUVOV 7TOOOS £€J>OU. 5 for mind 
 
 ovpyov] Here, as in Tim. 41a, 
 the universe is entirely de- 
 pendent upon the Creator for 
 immortality. The word 89/u- 
 ovpyos in Plato is equivalent to 
 6 ^vvi(TTas, 6 £vvappoo-as, 6 yev- 
 vT]a-as, and has only the faintest 
 trace of the mystic solemnity 
 with which it was afterwards 
 invested. 
 
 2. fit' eavrov] Eusebius has 
 eavrov, and the reading of the 
 Bodleian (with An), fit' eavrov 
 eavrov (sic Bodl.), perhaps indi- 
 cates some confusion. But St' 
 eavrov, signifying that the world 
 at such a time is the ultimate 
 cause of his own motion, is not 
 certainly wrong. Cf. Legg. 10, 
 903 e : peraj3dX\ei — fit' eavrijv rj 
 St' erepav -^rvx^v. 
 
 Kara icaipbv d<fiedevra roiov- 
 
 rov] " Being let go at such a 
 favourable moment." It is 
 true that supposing the mo- 
 tion equable, every moment 
 would be, mechanically speak- 
 ing, alike. But then other 
 causes, besides those merely 
 mechanical, are imagined. The 
 av^cpvroi iiviOvpia is not a me- 
 chanical cause. Compare the 
 "opposite powers" of motion 
 attributed in the Timseus (38 d) 
 to the circle of Mercury and 
 Venus and that of the Sun. 
 Two conditions, then, contri- 
 bute to make possible the 
 length of the succeeding period 
 — the state of the innate im- 
 pulse at the time at which the 
 
 " engine is reversed," and the 
 shape and position of the 
 whole mass. The redundant 
 form of the sentence in which 
 both these conditions are ex- 
 pressed is characteristic of the 
 later manner of Plato. Stall- 
 baum has not chosen to ex- 
 plain his objection to this way 
 of taking the words. 
 
 3. 7roAAas nepiodav pvpid8as] 
 " Many times ten thousand re- 
 volutions," i. e. days, since the 
 diurnal revolution is the one 
 most naturally attributed to 
 the whole Heaven. Cf. Theaat. 
 
 153 C : ems pev av rj neptyopci 
 f) Kivovpevr] Kal 6 fjXios. Tim. 
 39 C : vvf- pev ovv fjpepa re ye- 
 yovev — t] rr)s puis /cat <ppuvipa>- 
 rdrrjs KVKKrjaecos TrepioSos. 
 
 4. lo-oppoTTOirarov] Because it 
 is the most perfect sphere. 
 
 era arpiKpordrov fialvov 710- 
 
 80s] Moving on the smallest 
 pivot — in fact, a mathemati- 
 cal point — in modern lan- 
 guage, the celestial south pole. 
 Like the Indian tortoise, the 
 Univei-se has no surface on 
 which to rest. The image of 
 the top, used for another pur- 
 pose in Rep. 4, 436 d (orav ev 
 ra airy irrj^avres to Kevrpov 
 7repL(pepcDVTat), has probably sug- 
 gested this expression. The Uni- 
 verse is like a great humming- 
 top when " sleeping." Cf. 
 
 Legg. IO, 893 d: /cat Tore pev 
 eo-riv ore j3ao-ii/ evos KeKrrjpeva 
 TLvbs Kevrpov. 
 
 II 
 
50 
 
 riAATON()2 
 
 cannot lie 
 
 opposed tu 
 
 mind. But, 
 which 
 
 alone re- 
 mains, it is 
 at one time 
 guided l>\ 
 its Divine 
 Author, 
 and re- 
 ceives from 
 him a re- 
 newal of 
 life and im- 
 mortality. 
 And again, 
 being let 
 go at the 
 most au- 
 spicious 
 moment, 
 it makes 
 countless 
 revolutions 
 
 NE. 20. tbaiverai y ovv 5?) kcu pa\a etKorco? p- 27a 
 €ipi]ir0at ttuvO' oaa 8l€\i]Xv0u9. 
 
 SE. AoyiadpevoL 8r) ^vvvor)cra>pev to 7ra0o? e/c 
 tcov vvv XeyOevTOiv, o tv<jlvtu>v e'(.jjap€v elvat tcov Oav- 
 5 paaTcov aiTiov. eari yap ovv 8rj tovt clvto. 
 
 NE. 20. To ttoiov; 
 
 SE. To rr)v rov ttolvtos (j)opav totI p.tv €(/)' a vvv 
 KVKXelrai (pepeaOcu, Tore <5' eiri tuvuvtm. 
 
 NE. 20. Ilw? 8r) ; 
 [ ° HE. TavTi]v Trjv p.era(3o\r)v ■qyeiaOcu Set tcov irc-pi 
 rov ovpavov yiyvopevcov Tpoircov waacov elvai pe- c 
 yiarrjv kcu TeXecoTUTt^v rpowr\v. 
 
 NE. 20. "Eolk€ yovv. 
 
 1 . /xaXa eifcdrwy] The Stranger 
 has indeed spoken with an ap- 
 pearance of artless simplicity 
 well ' calculated to impose on 
 the imagination of youth. 
 
 3. Aoyiadpevot. 8ij] " Let US, 
 
 reasoning on what has now 
 been said, try to comprehend, 
 in all its bearings, the fact 
 which we described as the 
 cause of all the phenomena 
 that have excited our wonder." 
 
 7. (popciv — (pepecrdai] Cf. 
 Theset. 153 d : rj nepicpopa rj 
 Kivovpevrj. Legg. 10, 906 b : al 
 — (prjpai (pacTLV. 
 
 9. Has 817 ;] Badh. " Haec 
 omnia adeo lucid a explicata 
 sunt, ut mireris cur Socrates 
 etiamnum hsereat, et per ilia 
 7rwj Si) respondeat. Neque 
 vero Hospes dubitantem do- 
 cere dignatur, sed ulterius 
 pergit." One point, however, 
 was not made clear, namely, 
 how the change of the direc- 
 tion of revolution was the 
 cause of the other two tradi- 
 
 tions : and it is this which the 
 Stranger (though beginning av- 
 codev iroOev un dpxrjs) proceeds 
 
 to explain. 
 
 IO. t5>v 7rep\ rov ovpavov ytyVO- 
 peVCOV Tp07TO>v] Tile TpOTTT) Tj\iOV, 
 
 or solstice, is the change in 
 the apparent motion of the 
 sun's place on the horizon at 
 rising and setting. Horn. Od. 
 O, 404 ; Plat. Legg. 12, 945 d. 
 The word rpoivr, is here gene- 
 ralized and extended so as to 
 include every cardinal change 
 in the celestial motions : in 
 the same lofty spirit in which 
 the Great Year (reXeos eviavros) 
 is spoken of in the Timseus, 
 or as we speak of the year of 
 Saturn or Uranus. The word 
 seems to be used in the same 
 general sense in Tim. 39 d : 
 
 tcov ao~Tp(ov oo~a 81 ovpavov no- 
 pc-vopeva eV^e rpoivas. Compare 
 
 also Ar. de Ccelo II. 14, §1, 
 who says that if the Earth has 
 a double motion there must be 
 rpoTta\ also of the fixed stars. 
 
riOAITIKOS. 
 
 51 
 
 270. BE. MeylcTTa? roivvv kcll /j.€Ta(3oAas xprj vo/jli(Jelv 
 yiyvecrOcLL rore tols ivrh? yjlilv oXkovctlv clvtov. 
 
 NE. 20. Kai TOUT €LK09. 
 
 37 E. MeTafioXa? Se fxeydXas kcll iroXXd? kcll ttclv- 
 tolcls avfx<pepofX€va9 dp ovk lo-/jl€v rrjv tcov (ochov 5 
 (fyvcnv otl xaXeirws dpe^erai ; 
 d NE. 20. n«y 6° ov; 
 
 37E. <$>0opcu roivvv i£ dvdyK7]9 rore fieyiorou 
 £jv{a/3cllvovcti rwv re dXXcov (cocov, Kai 8r) kcll to tcov 
 avOpcoiroov yivos oXiyov rt TrepiXelireTai. 7rep\ Se tov-io 
 tovs aXXa re TradrjfxaTa iroXXa kcll 6av\iao~Ta kcll 
 Kawd ijvfi7ri7fT€i, fie'yLcrTOv be rode kcll <~vveTto\ievov 
 rfj rod iravTos dveiXlljei, rore OTav r) tt}? vvv Ka6e- 
 (TTr)KVLas ivavTLCL yiyvr)TCLL Tpoirr). 
 
 NE. 20. To iTOLov : 15 
 
 by itself, 
 like .-i huge 
 and per- 
 Eectlj -ba- 
 lanced top, 
 revolving 
 on the 
 fill- -t \M-ji. 
 This 
 
 change is, 
 as it were, 
 the solstice 
 of the great 
 year. And 
 this crown- 
 ing change 
 involves 
 many lesser 
 changes, 
 destructive 
 to the 
 animal 
 economy. 
 Hence 
 many crea- 
 tures per- 
 ish, and of 
 mankind 
 also but 
 
 2. rots euros rjfiiv oIkoxxtlv 
 aired] This is one of the in- 
 versions or alternations of 
 words with which these dia- 
 logues abound. 
 
 5. (rvp<pepope'vas] " Coming 
 
 on together," as in hostile 
 array. Cf. Theeet. 152 e : vvp- 
 (pepe<rda>v. lb. 153 a: rocrovrov 
 a-rpaTonehov. " When sorrows 
 come, they come not single 
 spies, but in battalions." 
 
 g. rav re aXXcov Trepihe'i- 
 
 Trerai] The sentence returns 
 to the indicative mood al- 
 though redundant, because the 
 last clause contains the prin- 
 cipal statement. Cf. Thuc. 
 
 "VI. 32 : i\ex6rj(rav roioi'Se Xoyoi 
 
 riVo re aXXcov Kai 'EppoKpdrqs 
 
 6 "Eppcovos — eXeye roidde. 
 
 IO. TOVTOVs\ SC TOVS TCOV CLV- 
 
 flpdmwv nepiXeLTTopevovs. yevos 
 om. pr. n. 
 
 11. aXXd T£ Tvad^para — piyi- 
 (ttov 8e ro'Se] Cf. Tim. 20 a : 
 Tipaios re Kptriav Se — , alib. 
 
 12. gvpninTei] "Coincide." 
 The meaning of £w is promi- 
 nent, as in £vp(pepopevovs. 
 
 gwerropevov] Following the 
 analogy of the world's un- 
 twisting. Consentaneous with 
 the rebound and reverse mo- 
 tion of the Great Whole. 
 
 13. orav fj rrjs vvv rponrj] 
 
 r?7S vvv nadeaTTjKvias, SC. TpoTrrjs, 
 which, like the plural rpoTrals 
 below, 271 c, signifies not only 
 the " turn," but the cycle of 
 movement which follows. The 
 double meaning of the English 
 word "revolution" nearly cor- 
 responds to this ambiguity of 
 rpoTTTj. " When there occurs 
 the transition to the cycle 
 opposite to that in which we 
 live." 
 
 H 2 
 
nAATQNOS 
 
 SE. ''Hi/ rjAiKiav €KacTTOV eiye rwv £coa)v, avrrj p. 270 
 TTpcorov pclv eon) 7rdvTcou, Koi iiravcraro TTOLV 0(JOV rjv 
 Ovr/Tov iiri to yepainpov ISfiv iropevopievov, /uera/3aA- 
 Xov 8e 7ra\i.v irrl tovvolvtLov olov veoWepov kou anra- e 
 
 few are 
 left. And 
 on these 
 few there 
 
 passes a 
 
 mighty 
 
 elian-e. 
 
 As the 
 
 movement 5 X(OTep0V €(t)V€TO. KOLl TtOV fJL6V TTptafivTepOdV CCl AeVKCU 
 
 of the , , , m / , v 
 
 world, so rpt)(€9 e/xeXaLUOUTO, tcov o av yeveuovrcov ai irapdiai 
 
 i. T]\iKinv] " Condition, or 
 appearance, in respect of youth 
 or age." Cf. Euthyd. 271 b: 
 
 pd\a ttoXv eViSeScoKeVai poi 
 
 e'8o£e Kai — ov ttoXv tl ti]v t\K\.k\.o.v 
 duicptpeiv KpiroftovXov. This use 
 of the word affords a point of 
 transition to the meaning of 
 " size" or " stature." Cf. Hdt. 
 III. 16, IV. in. 
 
 2. eTravaaro — 77opevopevov ] 
 
 "All that is mortal ceases at 
 such a time to advance towards 
 a more ancient look." to yepal- 
 Tepov Ibelv, " that which is more 
 aged to look upon." Cf. Phsedr. 
 253 d : XevKos I8e7v. Tim. 52 d : 
 
 7ravToba7rrjV ISeiv. Soph. CEd. 
 
 Col. 327 : Svcrpop' opav. 
 
 4. olov vearepov] " Younger 
 to all appearance." 
 
 Badham conj. I6v, which is 
 free from objection. But olov 
 vearepov exactly expresses 
 " younger in appearance, 
 though not in years." and 
 
 corresponds with yepalrepov 
 
 I8eiv supr. The instance of 
 olov with an adj., given by 
 
 Passow, ai olov o-we^els klvtj- 
 
 o-eis, is from a late authority 
 (Schol. Ap. Kh. 3, 1 01 8). But 
 the use is so closely analogous 
 to other uses as hardly to 
 need defence. Cf. infr. 277 c: 
 
 ttjv — olov roll <papp.a.KOis Kai 177 
 avyKpao-ei tcqv xP a H-^ TC0V evap- 
 yeiav. 
 
 5. ecfaveTo] He proceeds as 
 
 if he were nai*rating what hap- 
 pened on one of these occasions 
 in former time — say at the be- 
 ginning of the cycle preceding 
 ours. Cf. elx* supr. d. 
 
 6. yeveitoVTcov] The form 
 yeveidco is less distinctly incep- 
 tive than yeveido-Kco, which oc- 
 curs Synip. 181 d. "The 
 cheeks of bearded men grew 
 smooth, and restored each man 
 to his former bloom ; and the 
 youth's ' crescent nature' grow- 
 ing smooth, and dwindling day 
 by day and night by night, 
 returned, both in mind and 
 body, to the character and 
 likeness of infancy, and then 
 began to vanish away, and 
 presently was no more seen." 
 This process, which in any 
 case seems to have been rapid, 
 only occupied a few days 
 where life had been sud- 
 denly and violently extin- 
 guished. These cases seem to 
 be thought different from 
 those of natural death : pro- 
 bably because, in the latter, 
 dissolution was imagined, as 
 it had been more gradual, to 
 be more complete ; so that 
 earth could at once be mixed 
 with kindred earth. That 
 Plato is fully aware of the lu- 
 dicrous aspect of all this will be 
 obvious to any one who com- 
 pares the speech of Aristophanes 
 in the Sympos., 190-193. The 
 
I10AITIK02. 
 
 53 
 
 270. Xea.ivop.evai waXiv eiri ttjv irapeXOovoav copav e/ca- 
 cttov KaOlaTaaav, tlov 8e tj(3covto>v to. aco/xara Xeai- 
 vopceva kcu crpiKpOTepa kolO* rjpiepav kcll vvktol £k- 
 aarrjv yiyvop,eva iraAiv eh ttjv tov veoyevovs 7rai8os 
 (f)vaiv a7rrjei, Kara re ttjv ^j/v)(7]v /cat Kara to aco/ia, 
 d<pop.oiovpeva' to 8 evTevOev fj8r) p.apaivopeva ko- 
 p.t8fj to -irdpnrav e^rjfyavlteTO. tcov 8' av fiialcos- 
 TeXevTCovTcov ev tco TOTe \povco to tov veKpov [crco/xa], 
 Tama Tama Trdcrypv iraOrjpaTa 8id Taypvs, d8rjXov ev 
 
 27 *• oXiyais rjfiepai? 8ie(p0eipeTO. 
 
 NE. 20. Tevecris 8e 8rj t'is tot tjv, w tje've, (jcocov ; 
 kol TLva Tpoirov etj dXXrjXcov eyevvcovTO ; 
 
 SE. ArjXov, (h Sco/cpares', otl to pev i£ aXXr/Xcov 
 ovk rjv ev tjj TOTe (f)vaei yevva>p.evov, to 8e 8r/ yrjye- 
 ves rival 7tot€ yevos \e%Oev, tovt rjv to kolt eiceivov 
 
 4>6opa, which follows the great 
 rponx], has now been described, 
 and we are next informed as 
 to the mode in which the 
 Earth replenishes herself. The 
 existing generation being thus 
 " compounded with dust," the 
 Earth, which had previously 
 lain fallow, began to produce 
 her crop of heroes. 
 
 6. d(popowvpeva ] Badham 
 ingeniously conjectures cnro- 
 pewupeva. But the ellipse is 
 easily borne. 
 
 7. rav Te\evr<DVT(OP — to tov 
 veKpov [o-wjua]] For the redun- 
 dant genitive with the change 
 of number, cf. Phsedo 62 a: 
 
 oiSe 7T0Te Tvy^dvei tb av6pama> 
 
 — eo-Tip ore Kal ols, where much 
 needless difficulty has arisen. 
 The notion of the backward 
 current being communicated 
 to the process of animal life 
 illustrates the ancient concep- 
 
 tion of motion as including 
 change, o-apa ova. Bodl. An. 
 
 13. to e'£ aX\r)\oov — yevvu>- 
 
 pevov] Sc. yivos, or perhaps, 
 as sometimes happens, the ac- 
 tion of the verb is made the 
 subject of the passive voice. 
 For this, cf. Soph. 221 a : to 
 — avao-ncopevov. In that case 
 the concrete is put for the ab- 
 stract to yevvapevov for to 
 
 yevvao~8cu. 
 
 14. ev TJj Tore cpvaei] "Had 
 no place in the course of na- 
 ture which then obtained." 
 For a similar use of <pvais, cf. 
 Phsedo 103 b : to eV 777 cpvo-ei. 
 
 to — yrjyeves aval iroTe yevos 
 Xexdev] "The earth-born race, 
 of whose former existence we 
 have heard." 
 
 15. tovt rjv] " Was this, was 
 that which we have just hinted 
 at and ai*e now to describe." I.e. 
 to iv tt) tot€ (pvaei yevvmpevov. 
 
 the order 
 of the age* 
 of man, is 
 reversed. 
 
 And, at 
 the time 
 when the 
 world re- 
 turns under 
 the Divine 
 care, old 
 age is done 
 away, and 
 men pass 
 through 
 maturity 
 and youth 
 to child- 
 hood and 
 infancy, 
 and so pass 
 away. 
 And in 
 harmony 
 with the 
 same move- 
 ment, the 
 bodies of 
 those who 
 
54 
 
 ITAATONOS 
 
 ! < ■ ] > t in 
 earth arise 
 
 again. 
 This was 
 bhe giant 
 
 brood, of 
 whose last 
 relics the 
 
 tov %povov e/c -}/?;? naAiv dvaar pecjjo/xevov -, d.7r€/J.vr)~ p. 271 
 /J.OV6V6T0 <5e v7ro tcov rjfxerepcov irpoyovcov tcov 7rptoTcov, 
 01 TtAevroocrr) /xtv rfj irpoTepa irepKpopa tov e'£?;r 
 Xpovov iyeiTovovv, rrjcrSe <5e /car' apyas e((jvovTO' b 
 STovtcdv yap ovtol KtjpvKe? iyevovO' t-jfuv tcov Xoycov, 
 
 OL VVV V7TO TToXXwV OVK 6p0LO9 ClTTLCTTOVVTaL. TO yap 
 
 evTevOev, oipai, ^pj) ^vvvoelv. eyppitvov yap Icttl too 
 tov? TrpeafivTas eiri ttjv tov TraiSb? ievai (pvcriv, 4k 
 tcov T€T€\€VTr)KOT0i)i> av, Kei/uevcov 8e iv yrj, iraXiv 
 
 I. (K yi]s ttuKiv avaarp€(j:ope- 
 vov] The bodies which Earth 
 has absorbed she gives foi'th 
 again to be the habitations of 
 other souls. It appears cer- 
 tain from infr. 273 (however 
 strange the conception) that 
 the yrjyevels are born like the 
 army of Cadmus, in full matu- 
 rity, and then follow the stages 
 which are here described : 
 first attaining to eai'ly man- 
 hood, then to youthful prime, 
 and then to childhood, and so 
 disappearing from the Earth : 
 old age being literally un- 
 known, as in the description 
 of Hesiod. 
 
 3. nepicpopa] . Not " period" 
 but " revolution" = the time 
 during which the Universe 
 revolved in the former way. 
 Cf. supr. a, tt] rare cpiia-ei : infr. 
 274 e, tov £k tyjs vvv wepicpopus 
 Ka\ yevecrecos /3ao~i\ea. 
 
 4. eyeirovovv] " Were neigh- 
 bours to" — i.e. next in point of 
 time. Our first ancestors lived 
 in the times immediately suc- 
 ceeding the end of the former 
 
 motion. en i/ecoo-ri tov Ai6j ttjv 
 apxrjv exovros, Gorg. 5 2 3 b. 
 
 5. tovtcov yap ovtoi KrjpvKes — 
 
 tcov \6yav] Compare the care 
 
 which is taken, in Tim. 22, 23, 
 to account for the preservation 
 in Egypt of the legend of 
 Atlantis, and the disappear- 
 ance of the same in Greece. 
 
 6. vtto TvoWav — airto-rovvTcii] 
 
 Cf. Plnedr. 229 c: o-v tovto ird- 
 6ei to p,vdo\6yrjfia dXrjdes eivai ' } 
 
 K.T.\. 
 
 to yap — avvvoelv ] " For 
 we must seek to comprehend, 
 methinks, that which follows 
 what has now been said." 
 
 7. exop-fvov yap iaTi tw] The 
 
 dative after ixopevov is curious, 
 but exopevov eon is not quite 
 the same as ex erai 5 an d the 
 change of tg> into tov (if a 
 change were required) would 
 be easier and also better than 
 Stallbaum's conjecture of eiro- 
 p,evov for ex°l XfV0V - " Eor it is 
 of a piece with (hangs together 
 with) the aged men's returning 
 to the nature of infancy that 
 from the dead also," &c. 
 
 8. e'*c tu>v TeTekevTTjKOTav — 
 
 (pvopevovs] The irregularity of 
 the construction is caused by a 
 feeling that the dead persons 
 are not the same with those who 
 rise. This does not, howevei", 
 prevent the sentence from con- 
 tinuing as if tovs TerfXevT- 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 55 
 
 271. e\el ^vvKTTaixevovs kcll dva(Biodo-K.oiievovs,\*} rfj Tp07nj 
 
 crvvavaKVKXovnevi-is els ravavrla ti^s yeveaecos, kou 
 
 y-qyevels Srj Kara tovtov tov Xoyov e£ dvdyio]? (fjvo- 
 
 c fievovs, ovtcos e\euv Tovvofia kou tov Xoyov, ocrovs fii] 
 
 debs avTciov els aXXrjv fiolpav eKo/juaev. 
 
 A few, in* 
 deed, were 
 exempted 
 by Divine 
 ordinance 
 
 t]Koras were the subject. Cf. 
 Thetet. 182 b : d\\' e'£ dp(po- 
 
 Tepcov npbs aXXrjXa avyyiyvopevcov 
 ras alcrdrjcreis Kal tci alcrdrjTa diro- 
 
 TLKTOVTO. TO. [J.€V TVClld ClTTa yiyV€- 
 
 crdai, ra be alcrOavopeva where 
 
 see note. So that the yrjyeve Is are 
 composed of the elements 
 which have been restored to 
 Earth from the life of the for- 
 mer cycle. The Word yqyevels 
 
 is a " tertiary predicate." 
 " Being born by generation 
 from the Earth." 
 
 1. dva(3tcjo-Koiievovs] " Com- 
 ing to life again." This, as 
 afterwards appears, is the 
 quickening of a soul which 
 has been "sown" into the 
 earth, infr. 272 e. 
 
 enecrdai, which is commonly 
 inserted before rjj Tponr), is 
 omitted in Bodl. A IT. The word 
 is unnecessary, and is very likely 
 to have been added, from con- 
 jecture, by some one who 
 thought the apodosis too long 
 deferred. 
 
 2. avvavaKVKKovpevrjs] Stall- 
 
 baum, following a hint of 
 Schleiermacher, writes o-vvava- 
 KVKXovpevovs, which he finds in 
 one MS. (Zittav). But this only 
 increases the obscurity, for the 
 phrase els TavavTia ttjs yeveaecos 
 is hardly intelligible. Teveo-is 
 is here used in the widest and 
 most abstract sense for the 
 general process of Nature, the 
 current of which is reversed 
 with the motion of the Sphere 
 
 (rfj rpoiTji = the change of mo- 
 tion), whence the old gi - ow 
 young, and the buried rise 
 from earth again : diminution 
 taking the place of growth, 
 and generation of decay. See, 
 for a parallel notion in mo- 
 dern poetry, " The thoughts 
 of men are widened with the 
 process of the Suns j" and cf. 
 infr. 273 c: ttjv em ttjv vvv yeve- 
 trcv 686v. 274 c: rrjs vvv irepi- 
 (popds Kal yeveaecos. Also Pha^dl*. 
 245 e : Ttdvra re ovpavbv Trdcrav 
 
 re yeveatv. See also Tim. 82 c: 
 
 Srav dvdiraXiv rj yevecris tovtcov tto- 
 pevrjrai, Tore ravra 8ia<p6eipeTai. 
 
 Badham, rejecting eneo-6ai, 
 COUJ. rpteiv for eKel. But cf. Prot. 
 320 d : tvttovctlv avTa (sc. ra 
 6vr)Ta yevrj} 6eo\ y^S evWov eK yr/s 
 Kal nvpbs p-l^avres k.t.A. 
 
 4. rovvopa Kal tov Xdyoi'] Sc. 
 tov yrjyevels (pveadai. For e^eiv, 
 cf. Thucyd. I. 9 : rr/v encovvpiav 
 — o-^e'iv. 
 
 oo-ovs pr] — inopicrev] Who 
 they were that were thus ex- 
 empted from the cycle of na- 
 ture may be gathered from 
 Plnedo 82 c : els $e ye 8eu>v 
 yivos prj cpiXoaocp^o-avTi. Kal irav- 
 TeXcos KaOapco ojtiovti ov Bepis 
 dcpLKvelcrdat. tlXX' r] tco (piKopadel. 
 
 Cf. Pha?dr. 249 a, 
 
 5. avrcov] I. e. of those 
 who should have been born. 
 The elements which should 
 have been united with the soul 
 are identified in the language 
 with the soul herself. 
 
 mg 
 
 thus bo 
 
 again. 
 
 5 There can 
 
;6 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 expression, as m pecrai vvktss. 
 
 IO. avTijs KVKkrjcreais] "For 
 
 first the whole revolution was 
 itself guided by the Divine 
 care." avrrjs gives emphasis to 
 
 KVKkrjcrecoi as Opposed to ra £cba. 
 
 I. e. The universal movement 
 which involves all else. 
 
 ii. enifie\ovfj.evoi] It is per- 
 haps implied that he acts only 
 through the inferior deities. 
 
 12. Tws vvvf — dieikrjppeva^ 
 The general meaning of this ap- 
 pears from infr. 272 e : ol Kara 
 
 TOVS TOTTOVS ovvapxovTcs TCp pe- 
 
 y/oT<» halpovi 6eul. But the 
 exact construction is not ob- 
 vious. Stallbaum proposes to 
 read 00s 8e vvv — tsovt tjv — Stft- 
 X-qnneva. The words as they 
 stand, however, will afford the 
 same sense without any tor- 
 ture, by supposing peprj to be, 
 like tou Kokocpava in Theaet. 
 153 c, or 8vo pept) infr. 283 c, a 
 cognate accusative in apposi- 
 tion, expressing the mode of 
 the action of ?ipx^. " The 
 parts of the universe every 
 way being divided under the 
 rule of deities, just as is now 
 the case in certain parts." (w9 
 
 vvv Kara ronovs ravrov tovto SC. 
 
 yiyverai.) This last idea, though 
 hardly consistent with the gene- 
 ral spirit of the myth, receives 
 some illustration from Legg. 5, 
 747 e, where the superiority of 
 the inhabitants of particular re- 
 gions is attributed to a Divine 
 influence : as of? 6eia tis enl- 
 ttvoui <a\ daipovoov Xrj^eis eiev. 
 
 Compare Milton, Comus, 18-29. 
 Phsedo 1 1 1 c : ko.1 S17 6ewv ?8t) 
 — ev vis rcS ovti oIktjtcis 6eovs 
 
 NE. 20. KofJLiSrj /xeu ovv tovto ye hzeTai Toh p. 37 ]| 
 epirpoaOev. d\Xd 8y tou (3lov ov hri ttj? Kpovov 
 (J)yj? elvai 8vvdp.ecos, iTOTepov ev exeivais rjv tou? Tpo- 
 ttous rj ev TGucrSe ; ttjv pev yap tcov dcrTpcov re kou 
 
 5 i)Xlov peTaftoXrjv SrjXov a>? ev eKarepacs ^ypmliTTet 
 tolls Tpoirals yiyveaOat. 
 
 SE. KaAwy tco Xoyto ^vpTraprjKoXovOrjKas . o <$' 
 rjpov irep\ tou iravTa avTopaTa ylyveadat T0I9 dv- 
 OpcoiroLs, i]KiaTa Tr)$ vvv earl Ka@ecrT7]Kvia? (fiopas, 
 
 toaAA' tjv teal tovto tt}$ epjrpoaOev. tote yap avTrjs 
 irpcoTOV 77/9 KVKXrjo-eco? r)p\ ev e7rip.e\ov/i€v09 0A779 6 
 
 0609, '[COS" VVwf KaTOL T07T0VS TaVTOV TOVTO, VTTO 06COV 
 
 2. ak\a §r] tov fiiov] The 
 
 fable of the yrjyevels has been 
 applied : the application of 
 the story of Atreus is evi- 
 dent : it only now remains to 
 find a place for the legend of 
 the golden age : when mpnov 
 
 ((peps £e[8wpos apovpa avTopciTT], 
 
 In that former cycle the spon- 
 taneous productiveness of the 
 Earth was as apparent in the 
 vegetable as in the animal 
 kingdom. 
 
 3. rais Tponals] The plural 
 marks the concrete form of 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 57 
 
 271. dpypvToav ttclvty) tcl tov koct/jlov p-tprj SieiAyppeva. 
 
 KOU 8r] KOU TCL {cOOL KCLTCL y€VY) KCLL dytAa? Olov l>OfJL€L9 
 
 Oeioi 8i€iAr)(f)€o-aL> 8atpoi>e9, avrdpict]? eh iravTa €kcl- 
 e (ttos Ikolcttois wv oh clvtos eveptv, coare out dypiov 
 r)v ov8lv ovre dXXrjAcou i8(o8al, iroAefios re ovk kvr\vh 
 ov8e o-tolctls to irapcmav ccAXa 6' oaa Trjs TOiavT-qs 
 eo~TL KaTaKoo~fii]o~€cos eiropeva, /jLvpi* av ely Xeyeiv. 
 to 8 ovv t(dv dvOpteircov Ae)(6ev clvto/jLCltov irepi (3iov 
 8td to TOi6v8e eiprjTai. 6eos eve^iev clvtovs olvtos 
 
 Deities, 
 each of 
 
 wli'iin was 
 all-miffi- 
 cient for 
 
 his own 
 flock in all 
 things. 
 Then was 
 nothing 
 wild: no 
 devouring 
 one an- 
 other : no 
 war or dis- 
 cord of any 
 kind. All 
 
 eivai. For SieiXrjppeva, cf. Al\ 
 Pol. VII. 6 : (3Xeyj/as — -rrpbs ttii- 
 <rav rrjv olKovfievrjv, cos 8ieiXr]Trrai 
 toIs Wvea-iv. Cf. also Critias 
 109 b : Geo! — airacrav yi]v nore 
 Kara rovs roirovs 8ieXdy%avov ov 
 Kara, epiv. For ravrbv rovro, cf. 
 
 infr. 308 e : tout-op 87; poi rovd' 
 
 1) ftaaiXiKr) (paiverai k.t.X. Legg. 
 
 4,713c. I. e. as now there is 
 a presiding deity in the Sun, 
 the Earth, the Sea, and in sacred 
 groves, &c, so then no place 
 was devoid of the Divine Pre- 
 sence and control : irdvra 8ai- 
 fiovmv TrXrjpr), as Thales said, 
 not 8ea>v eprjpa ehai iravra (Plat. 
 
 Legg. 10, 908 c). It must be 
 admitted that the text is not 
 wholly free from suspicion. Cf. 
 infr. 2y2e: 01 Kara rovs tottovs, 
 and note. Qu. an. legend. 
 wo-auTOJS 8' au Kara ronovs k.t.\.1 
 atirws being dropped from ho- 
 moioteleuton, the remaining 
 letters, S' av, might easily be 
 corrupted into vvv. The go- 
 vernment of fiept] is in this case 
 less harsh : the clause v-nb 6ea>v 
 — 8iei\rjfj.fif'va being explanatory 
 of Kara tottovs ravrov rovro (sc. 
 e8pa, i. e. rjpX ev eTnp.eXovp.evos rov 
 Koo-p.ov). 
 
 2. Kai dyeXas] As the subdi- 
 
 visions of each tribe. The word 
 recals the previous discussion. 
 3. 8ieiXrj<peo-av ] Answering 
 to 8itiXT)p.p.eva. As the parts 
 of the universe generally were 
 distributed to several gods, so 
 the lesser deities had the tribes 
 of animals distributed amongst 
 them. 6elot is to be joined with 
 
 8aip.oves. 
 
 avrapKrjs] Not self-sufficing, 
 " but sufficient of himself ;" = 
 airbs dpnav. Cf. SUpr. 268 a. 
 
 5. ovre dXXrjXcov e'ScaSat] This 
 
 thought is probably associated 
 with the Orphic abstinence 
 from animal food. 
 
 6. ttjs TOiavTTjs] Sc. delas. 
 
 7. Karo.Koo-pr)o-ea>s\ The ge- 
 nitive is accounted for by 
 supposing the participle to be 
 added pleonastically. " What 
 belongs to this mode of ten- 
 dance and is consonant there- 
 to." Cf. however Rep. 6, 504 
 
 b : rav Trpoeiprjpevav enopevas 
 
 drroSel^fis. 
 
 8. r6 8' ovv] "And accord- 
 ingly (to return to the point) 
 the tradition that mankind in 
 particular had a spontaneous 
 subsistence is to be accounted 
 for in the following way." 
 
 9. debs eJTKTTaTow] The 
 
58 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 iiruTTCLTMV, KaOdircp vvv avOpcoTroi, £coov ov erepov p. 271 
 Oeiorepov, dXXa yevrj (fxxvXorepa avrcov vop.evovcri. 
 ve'p.ovTO? 8e ixeivov TroXiTelal re ovk rjaav ovde ktt)- 
 (T6L9 yvvaiKcov kou 7ral8cov' €K yrjs yap avefiiaxTKOvTO p. 272 
 biravTes, ovSev p€p.vrjf.LevoL tcov irpocrOev. dXXa ra pev 
 Toiavra cmrjv irdvra, Kapirovs 8e d(j)dovov9 ei)(Ov diro 
 T€ SevSpoov kou 7roXXr)? vXrj? dXXijs, ov)( vtto yecopyia? 
 (j)vopevovs, aAA' avToparrjs dvahiftovonqs tyjs yijs. 
 yvp-voi 8e kou aorrpooToi OvpavXovvres ra iroXXa Ive- 
 
 same belief in a past theo- 
 cracy is expressed in the Laws, 
 with a similar allusion to the 
 Satumia regna, and is used to 
 point the same lesson, — that a 
 paternal government, as man- 
 kind are now constituted, is a 
 visionary dream, and that the 
 rule of Law, devised by rea- 
 son, which is all which re- 
 mains to us of Divine guid- 
 ance, is the best available 
 substitute ; 4, 7 1 3 c : olov vvv 
 TjpeTs 8pa>p.ev rots iroip.vioicri nai 
 oo~a>v rjfxepot, elcriv aye\ai' ov j3ovs 
 @o£>v oi8e aiyas alycbv ap^ovras 
 noiovpev avroio-'i rivas, ahX facts 
 avrcov 8ecrir6£op.ev, ilpeivov eKelvcov 
 yevos. ravrbv 8f] (cat 6 deos apa 
 (cat (pCkdvBpaTTOs mv to yevos 
 cip.eivov T]p.a>v eCpicrTr] ro ra>v 8ai- 
 p.6v<ov, b 81a. 7roAX/J9 pev avrols 
 pao-roiVt]s TToXXfjs 8' ijp.iv enipe- 
 Xovpevov r)pa>v, elpijvrjv re /cat atSco 
 (cat evvop,lav (cat d(pdoviav 8iKrjs 
 Trapeyopevov daracriaaTa (cat ev- 
 8aipova ra ra>v dvdpdiTrcov dneip- 
 yd£ero yevrj, 
 
 I. e7ricrrarcoi>] Cf. Gorg. 523 
 C : 01 eirifieKrJTai. 
 
 3. 7roXiT€tat] Forms of go- 
 vernment are rendered super- 
 fluous by the presence of a 
 Supreme Will. 
 
 re] The apodosis is broken 
 off through the expansion of this 
 clause by an afterthought, and 
 is resumed in ndpnovs 8e infr. 
 Compare with this passage the 
 description in the Protagoras, 
 p. 321, of the state of man be- 
 fore the introduction of the 
 arts of life ; and Glaucon's va>i> 
 7roXis in the Republic, 2,372. The 
 absence of property and mar- 
 riage in the perfect state is again 
 mentioned in the well-known 
 passage of the Laws, 5, 739. 
 
 4. dvefiiwo-Kovro] Rising from 
 the dust of former genei'ations. 
 Cf. supr. 271 b. 
 
 5. ov8ev pepv7]p.evoi\ Hav- 
 ing been steeped in the river 
 of forgetfulness, Rep. 10, 62 1 e : 
 and therefore ignorant of all 
 previous relationships. 
 
 6. and re 8ev8pa>v] Cf. Hes. 
 Op. et D. 233 : Wv8Uaio-i p.er 
 dv8pao-i I Tolai (pepei fiev yaia 
 ito\vv (Biov, ovpeat 8e 8pvs axpr) 
 p.ev re Cpepei (Sakuvovs, p-eaar) 8e 
 
 pe\lo-cras (c.r.X. ; and Horn. Od. 
 
 T. Ill: Cpeprjai re yaia p.e\aiva 
 7rvpovs (cat KpiBds, ftpldrjo-i re 8ev- 
 
 8pea Kapna, quoted elsewhere 
 by Plato, Rep. 2, 363. 
 
 9. evep-ovro] " Lived under 
 their shepherd's care." 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 59 
 
 272. fiovro' to yap tu>v tbpcov clvtols aXvirov €K€KpaTO, 
 paXaKas Se evvcts ei^ov ava(pvop.evqs €K yi]9 noa? 
 h a(})0ovov. tov Si] filov, co ^aiKpare?, aKovas pev tov 
 twv eVi Kpovov Tovbe b\ ov # Xoyo? eVrt Aihs elvai, 
 tov vvvl irapcov olvtos rjcrOrjaaL. Kplvat <5' avTolv tov 
 ev8cupov€o~T€pov dp av dvvaio re kcu WeX-qaetas ; 
 
 NE. 20. OvSapm. 
 
 HE. BouAet SrjTa eyco aoi Tpoirov tivol SiaKplvco ; 
 
 NE. 20. Haw p.ev ovv. 
 
 HE. Ei pev tolvvv ol TpocptpoL tov Kpovov, ira- 
 
 of wives 
 and chil- 
 dren, for 
 they sprang 
 fromEarth, 
 not know- 
 ing wlience 
 they came. 
 
 ' Contrast, 
 their life, 
 devoid of 
 care, in a 
 perfect cli- 
 mate, tak- 
 ing no more 
 thought for 
 raiment 
 than the 
 
 IO lilies of the 
 
 I . to yap tcov copa>v ] Cf. 
 
 Odyss. A. 565-8; Hdt. I. 142; 
 Plat. Legg. 5, 747. 
 
 3. dKovets pev] Subaud. 
 jjarBrja-ai S' ov (" although you 
 have not seen"). 
 
 4. bv * Adyo? — eivai ] bv 
 a>s CH rcB cos cett. This pro- 
 bably implies the same feeling 
 of half- credulous or ironical 
 respect towards the popular 
 religion which appears in Tim. 
 40 d. To Plato the mythology 
 of his countrymen was but a 
 rumour, an echo from the past. 
 
 5. iTapwv] " As an eye-wit- 
 ness." So the word is fre- 
 quently used (pleonastically as 
 here) by Sophocles, e. g. (Ed. 
 Col. 1587. 
 
 Kplvai 8' — tov evhaipovecTTe- 
 
 poi>] Compare the judgment 
 between the just and unjust 
 life in Rep. 2, 360 d, and be- 
 tween pleasure and knowledge 
 in Phileb. 52 e. 
 
 8. rpoTTov rti/a] I. e. hypo- 
 thetically. 
 
 10. El pev — xP eias ] Compare 
 with the doubt here expressed 
 as to the happiness of the 
 golden age, the rejection in 
 the Republic (2, 372) of the 
 
 simple or primitive state as a 
 basis for the definition of jus- 
 tice. The picture of an earthly 
 paradise has been purposely 
 heightened, in order to enforce 
 the remark that this is not the 
 chief good of man. Cf. Eu- 
 thyd. 289 b : ovde ye el rts 
 ecrriv e7no~Tr]pr], coore aOavarovs 
 iroieiv civev tov inio-TacrdaL Tjj 
 cidavacriq \prjO-8ai, ovbe tcivttjs 
 eoiKev ocpe'hos ov8e'v. See also 
 LyS. 221 e : Horepov, rjv A - ' eyco, 
 npos Aios, eav to kcikov aTToXrjTcu, 
 ovSe Treivfjv en ecrTai ov8e Biyp-fp, 
 ov8e ciXXo ov8ev tcov toiovtcov 
 
 k.t.X. The identification of 
 the king with the shepherd, 
 and the notion of a theocracy, 
 to which Plato here inclines, 
 but which he rejects as un- 
 suited to the present state of 
 man, seem to be of Pythago- 
 rean origin. Cf. Pythagor. Fr. 
 § 2. (Mullach p. 533) : *E X « 8e 
 
 Kol cos 6e6s 7roTt Koapov paaiXevs 
 Trpbs ivokiVj kcu cos iroXis ttotI koct- 
 pov, /3acrtXei(S irpos 6e6v. a pev yap 
 noXis Ik ttoXXcov Ka\ 8ia(pep6vTcov 
 o-vvappocrdelcra Kocrpco avvTa^iv 
 Ka\ appoviav peplpaTat, 6 8e /3a- 
 criXeis cipxav e'x<ov avvnevOvvov, 
 Ka\ avTos Cov vopos ep\f/vxos, deos 
 
 I Z 
 
60 nAATONC)2 
 
 povtrqs avTois ovtco 7roXXr/? cr^oA?}? kul Svvaptcos p. 272^2 
 717509 to jju) p.6uov avOpwirois aXXa koll Orjploi? Sia 
 Xoyoov fivvaaOca ^vyyiyvecrOai, Karexpwvro tovtols c 
 £y\nra(Tiv eir\ <])iXo<TO(]uav, perd re 6r)pii£>v koli per 
 5 aXX^Xcou optXovvTe?, kou irvv6av6p.evoL irapa Truo-rjs 
 (puo-eo)9 ei TLva tls id lav Svvapiv eyovaa fjaOero tl 
 diatyopov tcov aXXcov as* auvayupphv (ppovr)ar€cos, 
 
 ev avopcoTTOis 7rapeo~x r ll JLaTLa " raL - 
 
 Ibid. § 3, p. 535 ; 6c6iuii6v 
 
 e'vrc n pay pa fiacriXeia. These 
 
 fragments, however, belong to 
 a later time. See Introduction 
 to the Statesman, § 3. It is 
 left uncertain what deity had 
 charge of the human race. But 
 the notion of Deity is so far 
 generalized that this matters 
 little. See, hoAvever, the words 
 rav eir\ Kpovov — ol rpocpipoi rov 
 Kpovov. 
 
 (9.) ol rp6(pip.oi rov Kpovov] 
 " The flock or charge (lit. 
 'nurslings') of Kpovos." The 
 name is peculiarly applicable 
 in the present case, where the 
 Deity in charge not only go- 
 verns, but attends to all the 
 varied wants of those whom 
 he governs, avrapKrjs $>v ols 
 
 avros vep.ii. So also in Rep. 
 and Laws, those for whose 
 education the speakers are 
 providing are spoken of by 
 the same affectionate name. 
 
 R e P- 7 j 5 2 ° d : 'AneiOrjO-ovo-iv 
 rjp.1v ol rpocpipoi ; Legg. >], 804 
 a : ravrbv 8r) Kai tovs f/perepovs 
 rpocpipovs Set. 
 
 2. dWa ko\ 6rjpiois~\ The 
 traces of this in the regular 
 mythology were few. (Cf. 
 however, the stories of Procne, 
 Philomela, and the like.) But 
 the Fables of iEsop, and the 
 
 cycle to which they belonged 
 — partly invented to please 
 the childish imagination, but 
 probably not without sugges- 
 tions from Egypt and the East 
 — were sufficient to suggest 
 the idea to Plato. See also 
 Porphyr. V. Pythag. 1 9 : (llvOa- 
 yopas <firjO~\v\ ore Trdvra ra yiyvo- 
 peva ep\j/V)(a opoyevi) 8ei vopi^eiv. 
 5. Kal Trvv8av6pevoi\ If other 
 
 creatures besides man could 
 tell their experience, science 
 would rest on a wider basis. 
 
 7. els avvayvppov <fipovr)o-e<0s] 
 
 " To contribute to the store of 
 wisdom." (Cf. Legg. 8, 845 e: 
 v8wp — o-vvayvpr6v.} The idea 
 that knowledge comprises all 
 the actual relations of things, 
 and arises only from the in- 
 terrogation of the most varied 
 experience, belongs to the 
 maturity of Plato's thought. 
 Cf. Soph. 259 d. For itho-a 
 (pvo-is, cf. Rep. 2, 359 c : 6 
 
 ivao~a (pvais 8ia>Keiv ire(pvKev o>s 
 
 aya66v. The close and friendly 
 intercourse with Nature, which 
 Plato here imagines, is well 
 described in the little German 
 fable 'The Story without an 
 End.' One point of coinci- 
 dence may be quoted — when 
 the child goes to sleep in the 
 cave, the grass springs up spon- 
 taneously to make his pillow. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 61 
 
 272. tVKpiTOV OTL TCOV VVV OL TOT€ pVpLCp 7TpO$ CvSaLflOVLav 
 
 fiiefepov, el 8e iparnrXapevoL ctltoov d8i]v koll ttotcov 
 SieXeyovTo irpos dXXyXov? koll tol Orjpia fivOovs, ola 
 d Srj koll tol vvv irep\ olvtcov XeyovTai, koll tovto, m ye 
 Kara rrjv epyv doljav d7ro(j)ijvaadaL, koll paX' evKpL- 
 rov. opco? <5' ovv ravra pev d(pcopev, eoo? av rjpiv 
 
 /JLTJVVTrjS TL9 LKOLVOS (PoLvfj, 7TOT€pCO? 01 TOT€ TOLS IttlOv- 
 
 p.ia<s eiyov TTtpi re e7naTr]pa>v koll ttj? tgov Xoycov 
 Xpela?' 01) $ €V€kcl tov p.v6ov rjyelpapev, tovto Xck- 
 tcov, Iva to fJLerd tovto els to irpocrOev irepaivcopev. 
 'R7T€LSr) yap irdvTcov tovtcov y^povos eTeXecodrj koll 
 pL€Ta/3oXrfv edet yiyvecrOaL koll Srj koll to yqLvov rfSrj 
 e 7rdv dvr/XcoTO yevos, irdcras eKao-Tr)? Trjs \j/vx^ Ta $ 
 
 the way in 
 
 which the 
 Quislings 
 <>f Baton) 
 employed 
 
 their gold- 
 en time. 
 Now when 
 5 that cycle 
 was at an 
 end, and 
 each soul 
 had ful- 
 filled the 
 number of 
 her births 
 from Earth, 
 the pilot 
 of the Uni- 
 verse let go 
 the helm. 
 Rebound- 
 ing with a 
 shock, the 
 mighty 
 
 JO 
 
 The same conception of in- 
 quiry, as a conversation with 
 the object of study, appears in 
 Legg. 3, 689 e : Trdcras cos enos 
 elnelv SirjpoorrjKa tcis Koivcovlas. 
 " Inquiring from every nature, 
 to see if one having some 
 peculiar power had perceived 
 something different from the 
 rest which might be gathered 
 into wisdom's treasury." 
 
 2. el Se ep.TriirXdp.evoi — ] Cf. 
 Legg. 7, 807 d : toIs 8tj Tairrj 
 KeKoaprjpevois apa ovdev Xeinope- 
 vov eariv kciI Tvavrcnracnv Trpocrrj- 
 kov, dXX' iv Tponcp Qoa-K-qparos 
 etccKTTOv niaivopevov avrcov 8el 
 
 grjv. Rep. 3, 407 a, b : 6 8e 8rj 
 
 irXovaios ovdev e^ei toiovtov 
 
 epyov itpoKelpevov, ov avayna^o- 
 pevw dwexeadai dftiooTov. 
 
 3. ofa] Flor. b. Ven. S. 0T01. 
 In either case pvdoi is to be sup- 
 plied as the subject of Xeyovrai. 
 
 6. S' ovv] But to resume. 
 
 7. 7roTepcos] The clause de- 
 pends on the verbal notion in 
 
 prjvvTrjs. 
 
 9. tov pxiOov rjyelpapev] " We 
 have waked from long slumber 
 a ghost which seems unwilling 
 to be laid." Cf. Rep. 5, 346 a : 
 
 ocrov Xoyov rrdXiv Kivelre rrepl rrjs 
 TroXiTelas ! — ovk tcrrf oaov eapov 
 Xoycov irreyelpere. 
 
 10. iva — nepalvoopev] " That 
 we may get forward with what 
 is still before us." Cf. Rep. 1, 
 
 346 a : iva ti Kai 7repal.voop.ev. 
 
 11. ttcivtoov tovtcov ^po'i'os ] 
 " The time required for all 
 that has been described." 
 
 12. efiei] Cf. Prot. 321 c : 
 
 ■q elpappevr/ rjpepa napr)v iv fj edei 
 Kal avdpooTTov i£ievai etc yrjs els 
 
 (pas. Compare Emped. w. 66- 
 
 69 : hvTap inel peya NelKos evi 
 peXeeacriv edpeepGr] | es Tipas t 
 dvopovcre, TeXeiopevoio \povoio, 
 o acpiv dpoi(3a~tos TrXaTeos TrapeXrj- 
 XaTat 'OpKOV. 
 
 to yrjivov yevos ] " The 
 
 race whose generation was 
 from the Earth." 
 
 13. irda-as — a7ro8e8ooKvias ] 
 " Having completed her pro- 
 
62 
 
 IIAATQNQ2 
 
 y€V€(T€LS riTrodtSooKvias, haa r]v eKaaTrj irpoaruyOtv, p. 27s 
 
 per cycle of births." For Pla- 
 to's doctrine of transmigra- 
 tion, see Phredo 82, 113, 114 ; 
 Rep. 10,618-620; Pbsedr. 248, 
 249 ; Tim. 42. According to 
 the Phsedrus (248 e), the pe- 
 riod here spoken of must be at 
 least 10,000 years. Empe- 
 doclcs and Pindar speak of 
 30,000. Tpi? fiii> pvpias &pas 
 dnu p<v<dpQ)i> aXaXrjadat. 
 
 I. on a — Trecrovarjs] " Having 
 
 fallen in so many sowings into 
 the earth as it was appointed 
 unto each (to fall) :" i. e. having 
 been sown in earth so many 
 times. Tbese words have oc- 
 casioned some difficulty. Cor- 
 narius, followed as usual by 
 Stephanus, read ko.1 8<ra, but 
 the clause is explanatory of 
 the preceding, and hence the 
 asyndeton. (Modestus cau- 
 tusque quurn alias turn in 
 Platone criticus Stephanus, 
 interdum tamen, ubi Ficinum 
 Cornariumve temere sequitur, 
 adeb sui est dissimilis vix ut vi- 
 rum agnoscas. Heindorf.) Most 
 
 MSS. have 77poo-Tax8evros avrct. 
 Badh. COnj.oVa r\v enacTr] ra npoo-- 
 raxSevra, Toaavra els yrjiva (TTTep- 
 para ela^vcrijs. And the Zurich 
 editors, adopting a conjecture 
 of Sauppe's, read yrjs enreppara 
 ("having fallen into so many 
 germs of earth"). But the clod 
 cannot be called a germ until 
 united with a soul. Tbe soul 
 is rather the seed implanted in 
 the earth. Stallbaum suggests 
 two renderings, making Toa-avra 
 cnreppaTa equivalent either to 
 Kara roa-avra (nreppara, or to cor 
 roaavra aneppara, the accusative 
 in the latter case being put for 
 the genitive by attraction from 
 
 ova. The latter alternative is 
 to be rejected, not only because 
 of die harshness of this attrac- 
 tion, but because no one who 
 wished to say " a soul must be 
 born so many limes from the 
 earth," would think of expres- 
 sing himself thus, "a soul 
 must fall into the earth as so 
 many seeds." In the former 
 Stallbaum has perhaps (for he 
 speaks obscurely) indicated the 
 true rendering : according to 
 which arreppara retains more 
 than usual of a verbal signi- 
 fication (cf. the unusual mean- 
 ing of Speppa, inf. 289 b), and 
 is in the accusative cognate 
 after Trecrovo-rjs, while els yf]v 
 depends partly on -neaovo-qs, 
 but directly and chiefly on 
 a-Treppara. The sense becomes 
 clear when o-Trapeio-qs is substi- 
 tuted in thought for ireaovo-qs. 
 If Plato had written Toaavra 
 els yfjv (nreppara anapeicrqs (or 
 TTTcopara neaovo-qs, cf. .ZEsch. 
 
 Prom. 921), there could have 
 been no doubt as to his mean- 
 ing. Cf. Legg. 8, 841 d : 
 advra Se naK'XaKcbv CT7rep|a.aTa pq 
 cmeipeiv, pqbe ayova dppevcov Trapa 
 cpvo-iv : and compare Tim. 4 1 e : 
 
 Se'oi Se o-rrapeiaas avTas{ras^/vxds) 
 els ra TvpoaqnovTa eKaarais e<aara 
 opyava XP° V0V 4>vvcil ^mwv to 
 6eo(Tej3e(TTaTov. lb. 42 c!: ecmeipe 
 tovs pev els yqv, tovs S' els ae\q- 
 vqv, tovs 8' els TaWa Sera opyava 
 Xpovov. to Se pera rbv a-nopov 
 toIs veois irapeScoKe 6eo7s acopaTa 
 TrkaTTeLV 6vr]Ta k.t.X. TllUS the 
 
 souls are sown into the earth 
 and there a body is given to 
 each. The verbal meaning of 
 oireppa ( = the act of sowing, 
 not the seed,) occurs in Hes. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 63 
 
 ToaavTOL els yr\v aireppara 7T€aov(n]?, rare <5?/ rod 
 ttolvtos 6 fiev KvfiepvrjTy?, olov irrj^aXicov omko? d<j)6- 
 lievoS) ei? ty]v olvtov 7repiamr]v direaTi], tov 8e Si] 
 Koafxov ttolXlv auearpei^ev €i/uLapfjL€i>r) re kcu ^v/x([)uto? 
 67ri0vpla. iravres ovv oi Kara tov? tottovs o-vvdpypv~ I 
 
 destruction 
 of all kinds 
 of life: till, 
 settling by 
 degrees 
 into his 
 own path, 
 he followed, 
 
 as far as 
 
 Op. et D. 77 9» weppaTos 8p£a- 
 a6m, and Soph. CEd. Tyr. 
 
 1246, pvrjprjv iraKaiuiv (JTreppd- 
 
 raiv exovfra. See Passow's Lex. 
 s. v. Although the imagery 
 is different, the word Treaovarjs 
 recals not only the passage of 
 the Timaeus just cpioted (4 1 e), 
 but the prime calamity of the 
 soul described in the Phsedrus. 
 The above rendering is also 
 given by C. F. Hermann. This 
 additional reason for the ter- 
 mination of the cycle gives fresh 
 plausibility to the story. 
 
 1. rod tvclvtos 6 peu Kvfiepvi)- 
 
 r?;y] tov ttovtos heads the sen- 
 tence, displacing pev, because 
 the Universe is the real sub- 
 ject of all that follows. 
 
 2. 7TT]8a\[cQv ouikos] " The 
 tiller of the helm." The o'lag 
 was the part of the steering 
 apparatus next the steersman's 
 hand (Pollux, I. 89 : cf. iEsch. 
 Ag. 649, o'Icikos tfiyo!)!'). 
 
 3. els tt)v avTov nepicoTrrju 
 
 anio-rrj] " Retired to his own 
 pinnacle of contemplation." 
 Cf. Horn. II. g. 8, 23, 451 ; 
 Od. K. 146. The conception 
 of the Timseus is more ele- 
 vated (42 e) : Ka\ 6 pev 8fj 
 anavra ravra diaratjas ep.e\>€v ev 
 to> eavrov Kara rpoirov fjdet. 
 
 Though the idea of place is 
 almost entirely absent here, 
 it may be remembered that 
 the central fire of the Pytha- 
 goreans was called Aioy <pv\aKr] ; 
 
 and we may recal the v&rov tov 
 oipavov, which is the vantage- 
 ground of speculation in the 
 Phaedrus. 
 
 4. elpappevr/] Cf. et>ei above, 
 
 and the necessity pointed out 
 in p. 269 d, e. Cf. Tim. 470, 
 
 Sq<p : pepiypevrj yap ovv f] Tov8e 
 tov Koapov yevecris e£ ai/ayiajs 
 Te KCU vox) o-vo-Tno-ews eyevvl)6r). 
 
 crvp(pvTos iiri6vpia\ This " in- 
 nate proclivity" may be com- 
 pared with the blind principle 
 of spontaneous motion alluded 
 to in Tim. 30 a : iruv ocrov r/v 
 oparbv irapa\a(BcQV o{/)( rjcrv\'iav 
 ayov ciAXa Kivovpevov TrXrjppelycos 
 
 kcu iituktcos. It is to be ob- 
 served that this has a direction 
 opposite to the will of God. 
 
 5. 01 KO.TU TOVS TOTTOVS deoY] 
 
 It is evident from this that the 
 government of the several re- 
 gions was not wholly commit- 
 ted to the subordinate deities. 
 The Divine operation, imme- 
 diate on the whole, was at 
 once immediate and mediate 
 in every part. If the text of 
 251 e is sound, there is a false 
 echo in Kara robs tottovs — since 
 Kara tottovs, in the former pas- 
 sage as it now stands expresses 
 the partial nature of the Divine 
 superintendence in the present, 
 and not its distribution in the 
 former, cycle. The language 
 resembles Phsedr. 246 e : tu8' 
 
 eneTai o-TpciTia 6eav ts kcu 8cu- 
 povcov Kara evdeKO. peprj KCKOcrpr]- 
 
64 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 memorj 
 served, his 
 Gather's in- 
 struction. 
 But he 
 forgot this 
 by degrees, 
 from being 
 enclosed in 
 ;i " muddy 
 vesture of 
 decay," 
 which 
 clung to 
 him from 
 the chaos 
 out of 
 which he 
 was at first 
 
 res" Tcr> peyurTco Sul/jlovl Oeol, yi/ovre? rfdr) to yiyvo- p. 27.1:; 
 ptevov, a(j)ieaav av to. p.epi] tov KocrpLov rr;? clvtgov 
 eV^/xeAe/a?. 6 <5e ptTao-Tpecpopevo? /cat £vp(3a\Acov, p. 27 
 apXV? Te KaL TeXevrrjs ivavTiav opprjv op/irjOei^, crei- 
 
 5 a/JLov ttoXvv iv eavTW iroi&v, aKkqv av (frQopav ^cocov 
 iravTOKov aTTtipya.cra.To- p.6Ta he Tama irpoeXOovTOs 
 LKavov )(povov, 0opv(3a>v T€ Koi Tapa^rj^ rjSr] irav- 
 op.evos Kal tcov o~eicrp.(DV, ya\y')vr]9 einkafiop.evos eh 
 re tov elcoOora Spopov tov eavTOi) KaTaK0ap.0vp.ev09 
 
 l oj]6i, eTTLfieXetav /cat /cparos* e^oav avTos tcov iv avTa> b 
 
 fMfVTj — raw S' aXXwv iaoi iv rw 
 twv 8a>8eKa dpidpSt reraypieVoi 
 6eol apxovres, I'lyovvrai Kara ra£iv 
 fjv eKaaros eraxdrj. £u/i/3aAAa)x> 
 sc. iavT<0 : — " coming together 
 with a, shock :" cf. Theophr. de 
 
 SeilSU I : tovs tvttovs avdyKt) 
 avpfidWeiv iavTols, Soph. CEd. 
 Col. 901 : 'iv6a 8l(TTOfioi /jLaXiara 
 o~vp[3dWovo-iv iprrdpcov 6801. Hom. 
 
 II. n. 565. And compare the 
 frequent use of avp^dXXco in 
 Hdt. to express conflict in war. 
 I. rep peyiarcp 8aipovi #eoi] 
 Badham conjectures to jac- 
 yiCTTW SaifJ.oi'es Qedj. Cf. supr. 
 271 d, infr. 274 b, Legg. 8, 
 
 848 C : 6ea>v re Kal tcov irropevcov 
 Oeols 8uifx6vav. lb. *] , 82 1 a: 
 tov /xeyio-rov 8ebv Kal 6'Xoi> tov 
 
 koo-jxov. See however supr. 
 271 d, e, where 8aipa>v and Beds 
 are interchanged. 
 
 4. dpxqs re Kal reA. — opprj- 
 
 6eis] " Having received an im- 
 pulse opposite, both in respect 
 of beginning and end," — the 
 ■KoQev and the 71-ot. This of 
 course happens when a circular 
 motion is reversed : and aggra- 
 vates the violence of the imme- 
 diate shock. Had the world 
 " gone off" at a tangent," the 
 
 beginning would have been the 
 former end, but the end not 
 the former beginning. 
 
 5. aXkrjv av Cp6opdv\ Supr. 
 
 270 c. 
 
 8. els tov eladoTu 8popov\ The 
 vibrations are supposed to 
 cause a temporary perturba- 
 tion or nutation of the cir- 
 cular motion, as in a top that 
 is not " asleep." 
 
 The notion of vast cycles is 
 assumed in the Laws. Cf. 3, 
 680 a, where the first survi- 
 vors of the flood are called of 
 
 iv TovTd roi pepei ttjs 7repid8ov 
 yeyovdres. lb. 6, 782 a : TrdXeav 
 o-vo-rdo-eis Kal (pdopds Kal iiriTr)8ev- 
 para ivavTola ragecos re Kal dra^ias 
 Kal fipaaeos Kal Trcopdrcov re apa Kal 
 ftpcopdraiv iTTi6vp.iip.aTa 7ravTo8and 
 ndvTos Kal rvepl Tvdcrav ttjv yrjv 
 ap ovk oldpeda yeyovivai, Kal 
 o-Tpo<fids a>pa>v 7ravTolas, ev als 
 to. £a>a peTa(3dX\eLV avToiv irap- 
 TrXrjdels /xeraj3oXas etKosj 
 
 ei'sre — KaTaKoapovpevos] "Set- 
 tling down into his accus- 
 tomed course." Cf. Eep. 8, 
 
 560 a : al8ovs tlvos Zyyevopivqs 
 iv tji tov ve'ov ^v^f) — KaTeKoo~pr)6r) 
 rrdXiv. Supr. 271 e. Qu. an. 
 omittend. re 1 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 65 
 
 p73* T€ KaL eCLVTOV, T1~)V TOV 8l]/lL0Vpy0V KCU 7T(XTpOS U7T0- 
 
 /jLvrjfjLOvevcov SiSa^rju el? 8vvap.LV. kolt dpyas p.ev 
 ovv aKpifiecrTepov direTeXei, TeXevTcov 8e d/xfiXvTepov. 
 tovtcov 8e avrcp to acop.aToet8e? tyj? avyKpdaeco? 
 
 OLITLOV, TO TY]? TTaXoU 7TOTC (j)VCr€C09 tjl)VTpO(j)OV, OTL 
 
 iroXXrjs rjv jxtTeypv aTatjla? irp\v el? tov vvv Koap.ov 
 dcpiKeaflcu. Trapa pcev yap rod avvOevTO? irdvTa rd 
 KaXd KeKTTjrar irapd 8e tyj? ep.7rpoo~6ev e^eco?, ocra 
 c \aXeird kcll d8iKa ev ovpavw ylyverai, ravra e'tj e'/ce/- 
 vrj? avTO? re eyei koI to?? ftooi? evairepyaJ^erai. fiera 
 fiev ovv rov KvftepvrjTOv to. (coa Tpe(pcov ev avTco 
 cr/jLiKpd p.ev (pXavpa, fxeydXa 8e everiKTev dyadd' 
 \copi^6p.evo? be eKeivov tov eyyvrara ypovov del tyj? 
 
 brought by 
 his Crea- 
 tor : fY'iii 
 whom he 
 derives all 
 that he has 
 of good : 
 and in con- 
 5 junction 
 with whom, 
 in that 
 former 
 cycle, the 
 evil within 
 him is re- 
 duced to a 
 minimum. 
 But that 
 guiding 
 hand being 
 withdrawn, 
 as forget- 
 fulness in- 
 creases the 
 ancient 
 
 10 
 
 I. Trarpos] Cf. Tim. 28 e, 
 37 d. The word is used here 
 for the sake of the metaphor, 
 " Calling to mind his father's 
 instruction •" as in Tim. 42 e : 
 vorfaavres 01 irai8es rr)v tov Tra- 
 rpos bidra^iv, fxifj.ovfj.evoi tov 
 (npeTepov 8rjfj.iovpyov. 
 
 3. dfiftXvrepov] " "With less 
 
 sharpness and precision," as if 
 making an inferior copy of 
 some masterpiece of sculpture 
 or painting, or, " with dimin- 
 ished powers," " with less in- 
 sight," " with less keenness of 
 vision." The latter is more 
 probable. 
 
 4. tovtcov 8e — dcpiKecrdai ] 
 
 " Now this falling off comes to 
 the world from the bodily- 
 element of her composition, 
 which was inherent in her pri- 
 mal nature, since this partook 
 of much disorder, before at- 
 taining the present organised 
 form." Cf. Tim. 30 a : ttov 
 
 ocrov rjv oparbv TrapaXaficdv cv% 
 fjO~v)(iav ayov dXka. Kivovfievov 
 
 TT'\r]p.u.e\a)S Kal draKrcos, els Tafjiv 
 avTO ijyayev in rr)s dratjias. on — 
 
 d(piKeo-8ai is epexegetic of the 
 previous clause. For the iden- 
 tity of the oparbv and o-coparo- 
 ei8es, cf. Phfedo 80 c: to opa- 
 rbv avrov to o~a>p.a. Several 
 MSS., including All, have fie- 
 roxov. 
 
 8. Trapa. 8e rr)s eixTrpocrQev 
 
 e|eo)r] Thus a time is ima- 
 gined before the alternate cy- 
 cles began. Compare the 
 thought in Rep. 10, 613, of 
 the just man : ova ye airb decov 
 yiyverai, iravra yiyvedai cos oiov 
 re apiara, el fir) tl dvayKalov 
 avrco kokov e< Trporepas dpaprlas 
 imijpxev. 
 
 Trapa 8e — f£fW, e'£ eiceivrjs] 
 
 The expression at first cor- 
 responds to Trapa p.ev — tov avv- 
 devros, but when resumed for 
 the sake of emphasis in a pro- 
 nominal form, is more strictly 
 adapted to the immediate con- 
 text. 
 
 13. tov eyyvrara xpoVoi/ dei 
 
 K 
 
m 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 aliaivliy 
 
 gradually 
 returns, 
 
 until the 
 world and 
 all depend- 
 ent organ- 
 isms are in 
 danger of 
 ruin. 
 
 "Wherefore 
 then the 
 first dis- 
 poser of the 
 world, lest 
 he should 
 founder in 
 
 a0ecrea)? KaXXtara iravra Sidyet, ir poiovTOS <5e tov p. 2J' : I' 
 Xpovov Kol XijOi]? eyyiyi>opL€i>r}9 ip avrco fxaWov kcll 
 Swaarevei to Trj? 7raXcaas uvapfiocrTias wado?, re- d 
 Xzvtcovtos Se l^avOa. tov \povov kol crpuKpd fxlv 
 STayaOa, ttoXXi-jv 8e ri]v tcov ivavTtaiV Kpaaiv eVey/ce- 
 pavvvpievos eVi diacjjOopas kivSvvov olvtov re a.(f)L- 
 Kvfirat kol tcou ip amui. dio 8rj kcu tot rj8r] Beo? 6 
 Koaprjaa9 glvtop, KaOopcov iv ouKopious ovtol, ki]86- 
 
 pL€VO?, 
 
 M 
 
 7 \eip.acr6eL9 viro Tapa)09 SiaXvOeh els 
 
 TTJs dcpeo-eas] Proximum quod- 
 que ab remissione tempus. 
 
 2. pdWov Kol — 7rd#o?] " The 
 influence of the old habit of 
 disorder also gains a greater 
 ascendancy." Plato's use of 
 
 7rd#oj, as of yevevis, is often 
 difficult to render from its 
 generality. Cf. Theast. 193 d. 
 
 4. egavdel] " Breaks out 
 into full bloom." Sc. t6 t^s- 
 dvappoarias nddos. Cf. infr. 
 310 d : TeXeuTcicra 8e i^avQelv 
 iravTamacnv pavlais. Aesch. Pers. 
 821.: vj3pis yap ef-avdova itcap- 
 7ra>o~e o-raxvv arrjs. So Stallb. and 
 
 Passow s. v. In what follows, 
 the sentence returns to the ge- 
 neral subject, 6 Koap.os. The 
 other renclei'ing, however, de- 
 serves notice ; in which 6 koV- 
 fios is the subject of i£av8ei, 
 which is explained to mean 
 " leaves blossoming," " ceases 
 to produce anything good." 
 
 5. 7toXKtjv eTveynepavvvpevos] 
 
 "Administering evil to itself 
 in large measure." ineyKepav- 
 vvpevos, lit. " pouring into itself 
 additionally." The world is a 
 great vessel, in which differ- 
 ent elements are mixed : and 
 during this cycle is itself the 
 
 author of the mixture. (Kpumv, 
 abstract for concrete). Or per- 
 haps the participle is passive, 
 " Receiving large admixture of 
 evil." (The passive of a verb 
 which governs the dative in 
 the active voice appears in 
 Re P- 1 , 337 a, and Legg. 11, 
 925 e, 926 a, 937 b.) For 
 the image, cf. Rep. 8, 562 c : 
 
 7rdXtf eXevdepias Si\j/r](ra(ra kokcov 
 
 OiVO)(6cOV TTpOCTTaTOVVTCdV TVXV 
 
 k.t.X. For the force of the 
 
 prefix in eTreyKepavvvpevos, cf. 
 eVeyxeoo, e. g. iEsch. Ag. 1 1 3 7 . 
 
 6. diacpdopds] This word, 
 if alone, would have been 
 passive, but by the addition 
 of the genitives is turned to 
 an active meaning. 
 
 8. KTjftopevos tva prj] " In 
 
 care for the world that it may 
 not" &c. A similar feeling 
 appears in Legg. 2, 653 c : 
 
 deol fie oiKTeipavTes to tcov dvdpai- 
 ttu>v eirinovov 7re<pvKos yivos — 
 Movaas ATroWcovd re povcrrjyeTrjv 
 Kai Alovvctov ^vveopracrras i'800-av, 
 iv inavopOavTat tcls rpocpds yevo- 
 pevas iv rais ioprals pera 6ea>v. 
 
 9. Iva pt] 8vt] ] " Lest 
 
 being tost with tempest it 
 might be shaken in pieces and 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 67 
 
 273. TOV TYJ9 aVO/JLOLOTr/TO? OLTTeipOV OVTOL TOTTOV 8vr}, irdXiV 
 
 e(pe8po9 avrov twv 7n]8a\la>i> yiyvo\JLtvo<s, to. voar)- 
 e cravTa koll kuOevra eV rfj KaO' eavTov rrporepa irdpt- 
 68a> aTpeyjfav, Koafiei re kcu iiravopOoiv aOavarov 
 avrov koll ayrjpcov threpyatjETaL. tovto pev ovv reAos 5 
 airavTOdU elprjTOLL. to 8* eVi ri^v tov fiacriAecos airo- 
 
 8tL^LV 'lKCLVOV €K TOV TTpoaOtV 0L7TT0p.€U0L? TOV \6yOV. 
 
 crTpecpOevTos yap av tov Koa/mov ttjv hri tx]v vvv 
 yevecfLv o8ov to t^s* rjKiKtas av TraXLv \0~TaT0 K.a\ 
 
 ■ 
 
 of dissimili- 
 tude, re- 
 verses tlir 
 process of 
 decay, and 
 restores 
 him to im- 
 mortal 
 youth. 
 The wheel 
 i8 thus 
 brought 
 full circle : 
 but for our 
 present 
 purpose 
 
 founder in the abyss of dis- 
 similitude." For a glimpse of 
 the darkening path towards 
 this limbo of " chaos come 
 again," see Parrn. 165 ; Tim. 
 48 e-52 d. In the chaos of 
 Anaxagoras, the 6p.otopepeiai 
 were at least latent ; but to 
 this new and worse chaos even 
 this degree of consistency is 
 denied. The words aneipov 
 ovra recall Pythagorean asso- 
 ciations. 
 
 1. Tonov has been objected 
 to. Stallbaum would read 
 ttovtov, and M. Wagner, in the 
 Kheinische Museum, has sug- 
 gested tvttov, which is too ab- 
 stract for the context (x €i - 
 pao-dels — 8vrj). Stallbaum's ob- 
 jection (Displicet istud roVo*/, 
 quo rnetaphoraa elegantia pes- 
 sumdatur) forgets the differ- 
 ence between metaphor and 
 allegory. The vagueness of to- 
 kos in Plato's use ( = "region") 
 exactly suits the passage. Cf. 
 Theset. 176 a ; Phsedr. 247 c, 
 274 d; Soph. 254 a; Rep. 
 6, 508 c, 7, 516 b, 532 d, 10, 
 614 c. 
 
 Trakiv — yiyvopevos] " Again 
 presiding at the helm." e'cpedpos 
 not = " successor," (Ast. Lex. 
 
 s. v.,) but according to the 
 tragic use with the genitive, 
 " seated on or at." 
 
 3. iv rfj — nepiuSa] " In the 
 former circuit which the world 
 made by himself." Ka6' iavrov 
 depends on the verbal notion 
 m 7repi6da>. 
 
 4. o-Tptyas] " Having re- 
 versed." Not only arresting 
 decay, but causing growth : 
 rfj rpoirfi avvavaKVKKovpevrjs els 
 Tavavria rrjs yeveaews, as before. 
 
 5. reXos dndvTcou etprjTai] Our 
 
 account of each recurring cycle 
 is complete. " The wheel is 
 brought full circle." 
 
 7. iKavdv ] Subaud. rjp.lv 
 
 \eyftv. 
 
 €K tov fvpoo-dev divTopevois 
 
 tov \6yov] " Taking hold of 
 the story by the previous 
 part." I. e. attaching what 
 we have to say to an earlier 
 point in the fable, viz. the 
 (pdopd mentioned in 273 a, as 
 ensuing on the change from 
 the obedient to the self-di- 
 rected movement of the world. 
 8. ttjv — 686v] "Towards 
 the present operation of na- 
 ture." Cf. note on yeveaeo)*, 
 supr. 271 b. 
 
 K 2 
 
68 
 
 nAATONOS: 
 
 we must 
 revert to 
 
 the in -in- 
 ning of the 
 period in 
 
 w hirli WO 
 
 live: when, 
 the uni- 
 verse being 
 left to it- 
 self, the 
 bodies that 
 were dwin- 
 dlingbegan 
 to grow, 
 and those 
 which had 
 just sprung 
 in full ma- 
 turity from 
 the Earth, 
 put on grey- 
 locks, and 
 went be- 
 neath the 
 ground. 
 Then, as 
 
 Kaiva rdvavrla dTre8i8ov rdis rare, rd fiev yap vtto p. 273 
 (TfiLKpoTijTo^ oXiyov 8eovra T)(f)ai>t(T0aL TCOV (fiXtiV 
 ■>lv£di>€TO, to. 5' e/c yr)$ veoytvrj acouara ttoXlci (j)vvra 
 iraXiv cmodvr)(TKQVTa ds yr\v Karrjei. kcu rdXXa re 
 
 5 iravra LieTefiaXXev, caTOLLLfiovjieva kcu ^vvolkoXov- p. 27* 
 dovvra tcd tov ttclvtos 7ra0r]paTi, kcu 8rj kcu to ttjs 
 Kvqtreais kcu yevvifaeco^ kcll rpo(j)r]9 uljirjua avveLirero 
 tols iracriv vtt dvdyKiqs. ov yap i$ji}p er iv yrj 81 
 erepcov avvicrravTcov (JjvecrOai tcoov, dXXd Kadairtp 
 
 ioTco Kocrucp 7rpocreT6TaKTO avTOKparopa elvat 7-779 avrov 
 Tropela?, ovtco 8rj Kara, ravrd koli tois uepecnv avrols 
 8l avrcov, Ka0 J ocrov oiov r rjv, (pveiv re Ka\ yevvav 
 /cat rpecpeLU TrpoazraTTeTO virb tyjs opLOia? dycoyrjs. 
 ov 8e ei>€Ka 6 Xoyos cop/mrjKt iras, eV avrco vvv iafxev b 
 
 I . miva. — Tore] " Made an 
 opposite inversion of the phe- 
 nomena." 
 
 to. pev yap — Karrjei] Those 
 
 who according to the previous 
 order had risen from earth in 
 full maturity, and had passed 
 through the stages of youth 
 and childhood, and were on 
 the point of disappearing from 
 the earth, returned to child- 
 hood, youth, and manhood ; 
 while those who had been 
 lately born, and were there- 
 fore in full maturity, instead 
 of becoming more youthful, 
 passed into old age and died 
 and went below the ground — 
 so preparing the soil for the 
 next crop of earth-born men. 
 
 3. veoyevrj] It is to be re- 
 membered that they are al- 
 ready full-grown. 
 
 7roXta (pvvra ] " Having 
 grown grey." The aorist re- 
 
 tains the temporal significa- 
 tion. 
 
 6. to — piprjpa] I. e. to ttjs 
 
 Tpocprjs pepiprjpevov crvveinfTO. 
 
 81 eTepoov o~vvio~Ta.vTa>v] DC. 6ca>v. 
 
 Cf. Tim. 43 a; Protag. 320 d. 
 
 9. <pvta6ai £a>ov] Bodl. A LEY 
 £acov. 
 
 I 3. vnb Tr/s opoias dyeoyfjs] By 
 a similar entrainement, by an 
 eddy from the same current. 
 Cf. Phsedr. 238 c : viKrjcracra 
 ayayfj. Rep. 10,604 b: ivavrias 
 8e dycoyrjs yiyvopevr/s iv tu dv- 
 
 6p(OTvco. As the world is moved, 
 so human beings are brought 
 together, by destiny and innate 
 desire (elpappevrj kcu crvpcpvTos 
 eTTiBvpia) : ov yecoperpucals aX\' 
 epaTiKals dvaynais. (Rep. 5> 
 
 458 d.) 
 
 14. eV avrcp — ecrpev] Cf. Rep. 
 5, 473 C : eV avTO (v. 1. avrco) 
 8tj eipi 6 tco peylcTTCo 7rpoo-eiKci£o- 
 pev Kvpari. lb. 7? 53 2 c • e '' ^, 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 GO 
 
 274. rj8rj. irepl pev yap tcou aXXwv Orjplcou 7roXXa av kgu 
 fiaKpa Si€^€\0€iv yiyvoiro, i£ (hv eKaara kou 8l as 
 airlas p-erafiefiXyKe' irepl 8e dvOpcoTrcou fipayyrepa 
 kcu fxaXXov TTpoarjKOVTa. ti)s yap tov KdKTr)fievov 
 Kal vepLOvros rjpids 8alp.ovos aTrepr/puoOevTes eVt/ue- 5 
 Ae/ay, rcof iroXXcov av drjpicov, ocra ^aXeTra tols (f)v- 
 a€L9 rjv, airaypL(£)6evT(£>v, avrol 8e acrOevels avOpaiiroi 
 c Kal dcpvXaKTOL yeyovores, 8ii]p7rd{pi>To vir avroov, Kal 
 er apxiyavoi Kal arzyyoi Kara, tov? 7rp(OTovs rjcrav 
 Xpovovs, are rrjs p.ev avTopbaTij? rpcxfirj? eVnAeAot- 10 
 irvias, TropL^eaOat Se ovk eTTKJTapLevoi ttco Sia to 
 p.r\8ep.iav avrov? ^peiav irporepov avayKa^iv. €K 
 tovtcdv iravTcov ev peyaXats diro plats fjaav. 06 ev <5/? 
 rd irdXai Xe\6evTa irapd decov 8a>pa rjplv 8e8ooprjTaL 
 fier dvayKaias 8i8a\rjs Kal 7rai8evaeo39, irvp p.ev 15 
 irapa Hpop.r)6em', Teyyai 8e 7rap' 'HfpalaTOV Kal ttjs 
 
 tlio world 
 was self- 
 impelled, 
 bo tin.- races 
 of animals 
 were left to 
 propagate 
 themselves. 
 And men, 
 being de- 
 serted by 
 their Di- 
 vine Shep- 
 herd, were 
 torn by the 
 now savage 
 beasts, 
 while the 
 earth no 
 longergave 
 them spon- 
 taneous 
 sustenance. 
 Whence 
 the gods, 
 who still ho- 
 vered near, 
 gave them 
 fire, mecha- 
 nical arts, 
 the vine, 
 
 avrco yiyverai tco tov votjtov re- 
 
 A«.' Soph. (Ed. Eex. 11 68 : 
 
 Trpbs avroi y elpl ro> 8eiva> ~kiya.v. 
 
 6. av] Used here almost as 
 a conjunction. 
 
 xaKeTra ] The opposite of 
 tractable : fierce and unman- 
 ageable. Cf. Rep. 6, 493 b, 
 500 a; bis. Legg. 11, 922 b, 
 950 b.^ 
 
 7. doSevels — Kal d(pv\aKTOi] 
 The myth at this point touches 
 closely on that of Protagoras. 
 
 Prot. 3 2 1 C : tov 8e avOpunrov 
 yvpvov re Kal avvTrobrjrov Kal 
 ao-rpcoTOv Kal cionXov. The whole 
 passage, giving an account of 
 the origin of the arts of life, 
 should be carefully compared 
 with this. 
 
 II. 8ia to pr]8eplav — dvay- 
 
 Ka^eiv\ " Because no previous 
 necessity had driven them to 
 
 invention." Cf. Theset. 149 c : 
 
 17 dvOpayrrLvrj (pvais do-QevecrTepa 77 
 \afielv Teyvr}v cov av g aneipos. 
 
 14. to. iraKai \e)(6£vTa\ Still 
 more of the existing fragments 
 of mythology are incorpoi'ated 
 into the Great Myth. 
 
 15. peT dvayKaias SiSa^y] 
 
 The Deity " left not himself 
 without witness." The parts 
 of the Universe were left to 
 guide themselves as far as was 
 possible (els hvvap.iv, supr. 273 
 a) ; but in their extreme need, 
 such Divine instruction as they 
 could not do without (dvayKaias) 
 was still afforded them. 
 
 16. Kal ttjs o-vvrexvov] Cf. 
 
 Prot. 321 e : t6 ttjs 'Adrjvds Kal 
 
 H<fiaio~Tov o'lKrjpa to kolvov, ev a> 
 eCpiXoTexvelrrjv. Legg. II, 92 1 
 d : 'HcpaiaTOV Kal \6rjvds lepov 
 to tcov 8r)p.iovpyav yevos, ol tov 
 
70 
 
 IIAATQNOS 
 
 the olive, 
 the sustain- 
 ing corn, 
 accompa- 
 nied with 
 such in- 
 struction 
 as was 
 indispen- 
 sable : and 
 thereafter 
 left them to 
 themselves. 
 Such is the 
 fable which 
 we must 
 now apply. 
 
 The myth 
 has brought 
 to lisjht the 
 
 avvTtyvov, cnrzpiiaTa hi av koll (jwra irap dXXwv' p. 27<f ! 
 /cat TravO' (macro, top dvOpcoinvov (3iov auyKare- 
 (TKevocKev, €K tovtojv yeyovev, kireihii to p.ev €K Oecov, 
 oirep ippyflr) vvv 8rj, rrj? eVt/iieAe/a? e7reXnrev dvOpco- 
 5 7TOV9, 8l eavTcov 8e edet rrju re Siaycoyrjv kcu ttjv 
 empcXeiav ccvtovs avTcov ^X eLV Ka @ a7r€ P 0A09 o 
 Koa/j.O'i, ch £vli\xillovllc-voi kcu fjvveiroLLt-voL tov de\ 
 yjpovov vvv llIv ovtco, rore Se Ikc-ivcos ^ixev re kcu 
 
 (fivOLLtQa. KCU TO fX€V $7} TOV LivOoV TfAo? €)(€TC0, C 
 
 lo^prjaLLiov 81 olvtov TroirjcroLieOa irpos to KctTiSeiv 
 oaov rj/xapTOiiev d7ro(pi]vaLi€voL tov (3cictiXikov re /cat 
 ttoXltlkov Iv tco irpocrOe Xoyco. 
 
 NE. 212. UcOS OVV KCU TTOCTOV CtLidpTT] fX(l (f)fj? dvCU 
 
 yeyovb? rj/xiv ; 
 15 HE. Tfj fxev l3pa)(VT€pov, ttj 8e LidXa yevvcuov 
 
 KCU TToXXcp LLtltpV KCU irXtOV ?) TOT€. 
 
 fiiov r/plv ^vyKarea-KevaKaat re- 
 
 1. nap aWav ] Denieter 
 aud Cora, Triptolemus, Diony- 
 sus. Cf. Legg. 7, 782 b. 
 
 3. to — £k 6ea>v — rrjs inipe- 
 \das\ Double constr. with the 
 article, ttjs imp. being added 
 epexegetically. Cf. supr. 271 
 e : to Tu>v dvBpinrov \e\6ev av- 
 TOfxaTov irepl /3iou. 
 
 7. co t-vp.pip.ovp.evoi koX £vv(- 
 Tropevoi] Cf. supr. 2 7 3 e : dno- 
 
 pipovpcva kcu £vva.Ko\ov8ovvTa — 
 
 nip-qpa o-vveiTreTo. gvp. appears 
 to be added by a sort of at- 
 traction from §war., by which 
 the dative is in the first in- 
 stance governed. It may per- 
 haps occur to the student to 
 render tjvpp-ipovpevoi " helping 
 the Universe to imitate (the 
 
 movement of the Divine 
 Hand):" comparing supr. 273 
 
 a : rrjv tov drjpiovpyov Kal ira- 
 Tpos diropvrjpovevcov 8i8axr)v els 
 
 dvvapiv, and infra 293 e, 297 c. 
 And this sense would not be 
 unsuitable to this expression 
 taken singly, and to to tijs — 
 rpocprjs plp.rjpa. But these words 
 cannot be interpreted apart 
 from the previous phrase, peTe- 
 
 @a\\ev dnopipovpeva kcu £vvaKo- 
 XovdovvTa tco tov navTos TraOi-jpaTi., 
 which can only be rendered in 
 one way. 
 
 9. reXos ex*'™] Cf. Phsedo 
 77 c; Legg. 4, 717 e. 
 
 II. oaov fjpdpTopev] Cf. 268 
 b, C : 7rws av ovv rjplv 6 Xoyos 
 6p6bs (pavelTai Kal d<epaios 6 ntpl 
 tov fiaaikeas k.t.X. 
 
 15. Tfj pev f$paxvTcpov\ " Our 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 71 
 
 274. NE. 20. riw? ; 
 
 SE. 'On [lev epcoTconevoi rbv e'/c 7779 vvv Trept- 
 
 (popa? kcll yevecreco? fiaaikea koll ttoXltlkov tov 4k 
 
 ttJ9 kvavrlas irepioftov iroLfxeva 7-779 Tore avOpooirlvr)? 
 2 75- ayeA^y eiiropLev, kcll ravra Oeov avri Ovtjtov, ravTr]S 
 
 fiev irafiiroXv iraprjveyOrjiiev otl 8e ^Vfjordarj^ ttj? 
 
 7r6\€(o? apxovra aurbv aTrecprjvapev, ovriva hi rpoirov 
 
 mistake in one way is less im- 
 portant" (than in another of 
 which we are now to speak 
 
 not /3p. rf Tore). 
 
 (15.) paka yevvolov] "We have 
 
 erred on a grand scale, and 
 our error is much more serious 
 and important than I then af- 
 firmed it to be." Cf. Phpedr. 
 2 57 e: vvxvov 8iapapTaveis. yev- 
 valos is often used with reference 
 to size, cf. Rep. 2, 372 b. Our 
 object was not only to shew 
 that the king has many rivals 
 amongst his flock, but also to 
 see an image of the " king in 
 his beauty," and to establish 
 his sole authority above other 
 artists. The image is found, 
 however, to transcend the re- 
 ality of the office in the present 
 order of the world, in which 
 the statesmen are not Gods 
 but men, whose natures and 
 training are not far different 
 from those whom they seek to 
 rule. 
 
 (16.) Tore] Sc. e'qbrjv. In 
 
 speaking of the king as the 
 herdsman of men we erred in 
 two ways — first, while truly as- 
 serting that his rule extended 
 to the whole state, we did not 
 sufficiently define the man- 
 ner of his rule ; so that our 
 definition included some func- 
 tions which belong to other 
 
 craftsmen : and secondly, which 
 is of more importance, we con- 
 fused the Statesman of this 
 present cycle with the Divine 
 shepherd of the golden age. 
 
 2. tov in Tijs vvv — -yeveaeus 
 fiao-iXea] Cf. Legg. 5, 7 40 a, 
 where the community of goods 
 
 is Said to be pel^ov f) mru ttjv 
 vvv ye'vecriv ku\ rpo<pT)v Kai Tiai- 
 8evo-iv. lb. 9, 853 C : eWSj? 8e 
 ov, KaQcnrep 01 naXaiol vopo6eTai 
 6ewv Traurl vopo6eTovp.evoi rois 
 r/pooo'iv, cos 6 vvv Xoyos, avToi t' 
 eK decov ovres aWois re e< roiov- 
 ra>v yeyovoaiv evofinderovv, dXX' 
 dvdpamoi re Ka\ a\v6pccma>v o-irep- 
 p.ao~i vopoderovpev Ta vvv, dvep.e- 
 ar/Tov 8rj (poBe'iadai k.t.X. 
 
 The same thought is present 
 also in Legg. 10, 906 : tos twv 
 
 (pvXaKcov \j/vxas kvvcov 77 Tas TOiv 
 
 vop.ea>v rj — Tas rav TvavTcmao-iv 
 aKpoTCLTav 8eanoTa>v. Compare 
 also Parm. 134 d : Ovkovv el 
 
 Ttapa rw 6eu> avTrj eo~Tiv rj aKpiffe- 
 o-TaTr) 8ecnroTela Kai avrrj f/ aKpi- 
 fieo-Ta.Tr) eTTio-TTjpr] k.t.X. Al'ist. 
 Pol. III. 8 : aianrep deov ev av- 
 Bptoirois eiKOS eivat tov toiovtov 
 (t6v 8ia(pepovTa kut dperijs vnep- 
 (3o\r]v). 
 
 6. ■napr\vex& r \P- fV ] " Went 
 astray." Cf. Phileb. 60 d : el 8e 
 ye TrapT]vex6r]p,ev tl Tore, vvv 
 oariaovv eiravaKaj3cov opdoTepov 
 elndra. 
 
 real grava- 
 
 lii'-n of ' 
 
 error. 
 
 Our defini- 
 tion of tin.- 
 ruler of bhe 
 statu is not 
 merely in- 
 adequate, 
 as we fear- 
 ed, but, 
 what is 
 more se- 
 rious, we 
 
72 
 
 IIAATQNOS 
 
 haw i-i ni- 
 Rued bhe 
 modern 
 Statesman 
 with the 
 Divine 
 Shepherd. 
 
 The myth 
 was intro- 
 duced that 
 we might 
 see in a 
 clearer 
 light the 
 image of 
 the kin sr. 
 
 ov 8i€i7ropev, TavTY] 8e av to pev Xe^Bev d.Xr)6e?, ov p. 27 
 p.i)v oXov ye ov8e aaqjes epprjdr/, 81b kou ftpayvTepov 
 7) kclt eKelvo rjpapTrjKapev. 
 
 NE. 20. 'AXrjOij. 
 5 HE. Aei. to'lvvv tov Tpowov, 6)$ eotKe, 8ioplaavTa9 
 T V? ®-p\ri9 tt}9 TroXecos 1 ovtco TeXetos tov ttoXitlkov 
 rjp.lv eiprjcrOou 7rpooSoKav. 
 
 NE. 20. KaXw. 
 
 HE. Aia Tama pr/v kou tov pvOov 7rapeOepe0a, b 
 
 iotva evSelljaiTO 7repl ty)$ dyeXaiOTpoffilas pr) povov a>5 
 
 TfdvTes avTrj? dpi(pLO~(3r/T0vo~L tco fyrovpe'vcp tol vvv, 
 
 dXXa KotKelvov clvtov ivapyeaTepov 'Idoipev, ov irpocr- 
 
 rjKei, povov kolto. to 7rapd8eLypLa 7roip.evcov re kou 
 
 fioVKoXcOV TTJS dv0pu>7TLVr/9 eTTipeXeiaV €)(OVTa Tpo<prj?, 
 
 15TOVTOV povov d^icodr/vou tov it poo prjpaTOS '. 
 NE. 20. 'Op0m. 
 HE. Olpai 81 y\ co *2coKpaT6?, tovto pev ert 
 
 1. Tairrj 8e av] 8e repeated 
 in the apodosis. 
 
 to piv — ahrjdes] This was 
 said previously, p. 268 c: oi 
 
 pevroi aTreipyacrpevoi ye eipev ttco 
 81 aKpifteias k.t.X. 
 
 6. rrjs apxijs ttjs 7rdXews] "Of 
 
 his rule over the city." In 
 what follows, it is shewn that, 
 although distinguished from 
 others, his function is still su- 
 preme. 
 
 9. 7rapede'peda] "Introduced." 
 Cf. Phileb. 46 b: oi prju 3>iAi7/3ov 
 
 ye evena napedeprjv tov \6yov. 
 
 Phsedo 65 e : prjTe tt)v oyj/iv 
 
 napadepevos ev tco diavoelcrdai. 
 
 1 0. iva ev8ei£aiT0 — pr) povov 
 
 dkX 'iSoipev] The structure of 
 the sentence is slightly altered 
 by the change of subject. 
 
 II. tco (rjTOvpevco Tavvv\ I.e. 
 
 tco ttoXitikco. For a similar 
 formal allusion to the subject 
 of inquiry, cf. Soph. 223 c : oi 
 yap ti cpavXrjs peToypv ecTTt Te'x vr }'> 
 to vvv £rjTovpevov, aXX' ev pa\a 
 iroiKiXr]?. Phileb. 5 b : i-a vvv 
 
 7toXXcikis Xeyopeva. Cf. Gorg. 
 451 e : ovBev tvco aacpes. Tim. 
 49 a : e'iprjTai pev TciXrjdes, Set §' 
 ivapyeaTepov elnelv ivep\avT0v. 
 I 2. ov Tvpoo-rjiceL, povov — Trpocr- 
 
 prjparos] " To whom it belongs, 
 having, in accordance with our 
 image, alone of shepherds and 
 herdsmen the care of human 
 nurture, alone to be thought 
 worthy of this title." The 
 order of the words is pecu- 
 liar, as is the case frequently 
 throughout these dialogues. 
 
nOMTIKOS. 
 
 73 
 
 175. fAeltpv 7) Kara fiacriXea dvat to ayj]p.a to tov Oeiov 
 
 C l>O/UL€C0$, TOVS 5' iu6a8e VVV OVTCLS TToXlTLKOVS TOL9 
 dp)(Ofl€l>OL9 OflOlOV? T€ elvOLL fiaXKoV TToXv TCL9 (f)Va€L9 
 
 Kal 7rapa7r\r]oriaiTepoi> 7rai8eia? peTeiXrjtyevaL koll 
 
 TpO(f)T)S. 5 
 
 NE. 20. I\a.VT(OS 7T0V. 
 
 aE. Ztr)TT)T€OL ye pnqv ov8ev av elrjcrav ovO* 
 fjTTOv ovt€ paXXov, et@' ovtco? eiT eKelvco? 7re<fiv- 
 Kao~iv. 
 
 NE. 212. rTws* yap ov ; 10 
 
 aE. TrjSe Si] ttclXlv iiraveXOcofiev. i~jv yap edjapev 
 
 avT€7riTaKTLKT}v pev dvat \re-yyrjv] hri {fi)oi?, ov \xr\v 
 
 d 18 la ye dXXa /toiisr} ttju eiripLeXetav e^ovaav, koi 
 
 TrpoaehropLev 8rj TOTe evOvs dyeXaioTpocpiKrji', — p.e- 
 
 [xvr\crai yap ; 15 
 
 NE. 2Q. Nat. 
 
 S"E. TavT7]9 Toivvv irrj 8i7]pLapTavopL€is. tov yap 
 ttoXltlkov ovdapov crvveXafiopev ov8' dtvopidcrapLev, 
 dXX rjpas eXa&e KaTa tyjv bvopcacriav ifccpvycav. 
 
 NE. 20. Urn ; 
 
 HE. Tov tol9 dyeXas eicdcrTas Tpe(f)etu tol? fieu 
 aXXois 7rov 7ra.cn pArecTTi vopevcn, tco ttoXltlkco 8e 
 
 But the 
 Form that 
 we have 
 
 seen is 
 higher than 
 
 tin: states- 
 men of the 
 earth, who 
 are but 
 
 On retra- 
 cing our 
 steps, we 
 find that 
 we gave 
 too narrow 
 a designa- 
 tion to the 
 art which 
 is sove- 
 reign over 
 living crea- 
 tures. 
 
 An " art of 
 nurture" 
 does not 
 include the 
 Statesman 
 at all, 
 though the 
 name ap- 
 plies to all 
 other 
 herdsmen. 
 
 3. fiaXXop ttoXv] So all the 
 MSS. except Ven. 3., which, 
 with the old editions, lias noXv 
 fiSXkov. The inversion is per- 
 fectly in keeping with the ge- 
 neral style. For rfjs, supra, most 
 MSS. have tov. And the Bodl. 
 
 has eVi/xeXet'ay, with All. 
 
 7. Zr)rr]T€oi — Tve<$>vitao-iv\ Ac- 
 cording to the principle laid 
 down in Soph. 227 b, and re- 
 peated supr. 266 d, that de 
 minimis ceque ac de maximis 
 
 curat scientia. 
 
 1 1 . iiraveXdajfiev] " Let us re- 
 trace our steps." 
 
 14. aye\aioTpo(fiiKr]V ] Supr. 
 
 262 e. 
 
 17. Tavrrjs — diTj/jLapravoiJiev] 
 
 " Our error lay somewhere in 
 this." The genitive is governed 
 by Try, and not by the verb. 
 
 19. Kara rr]v ovonacr'iav~\ The 
 
 verbal noun ovop.. occurs here 
 for the first time in Greek 
 literature. 
 
74 
 
 nAATQNOS 
 
 WY.sl.nl.ld 
 
 have spo- 
 ken more 
 
 generally 
 
 of an art 
 
 of tending. 
 
 And then 
 by follow- 
 ing the 
 same series 
 of divisions 
 we before 
 employed, 
 
 ov fA6T0i> eirrjveyKCLfxev Tovvopa, 8eov tcov kolvcov e?r- p. 27 
 eveyKtiv tl ^vpnraaiv. e 
 
 NE. 212. ' A\i]0rj Xeyet?, eiirep tTvyyave ye ov. 
 
 HE. Y\m <5' ovk rjv to ye Bepcmeveiv ttov ttolctl 
 skolvov, fir)$ev SioptaOelo-qs rpofprj? /J.r)8e twos aXhr)<s 
 it pay paTeias ; aAA' rf Tiva ayeAaiOKOpuKrjv 77 depa- 
 TrevTLKrju rj /cat Tiva e7Ttp.eXrjTLK^v auTyv ovop.ao~aaiv, 
 ojs KCLTa irdvTcov, e^ijv TrepLKaAvitTtLV /cat tov ttoXl- 
 tlkov a/za toIs aAAots", e7rei8r) [8eiv\ tout iarjpaivev 
 106 \oyo<s. 
 
 NE. 212. 'Opdm. aAA' 77 /xera tovto 8ialpeo-i? 
 av Tiva Tpoirov kyiyver dv ; p. 27 
 
 HE. Kara raura kolO* direp epnrpocrOev Siypov- 
 fieOa tyjv ayeAcuoTpoffiiKrjv ne^ols T€ /cat awTr/cri, /cat 
 
 i5afllKTOl? T€ KOU OLKepOLTOL?, TOW OUTOLS OLV TTOV TOVTOL9 
 
 dioupovpLevoL kou ttjv dyeXaiOKOpUKrjv ttjv re vvv kol 
 
 2. gvpiraa-iv] Governed by 
 
 KOtVQiV. 
 
 3. 01/] SC. KOLVOV TL. 
 
 4. rjv — lf£r\v — ecrrffiaivev] The 
 imperfect is used because we 
 are imagining what might have 
 been done. 
 
 6. depanevTiKrjv iTriu.e\T]TiKT]v] 
 
 The prefix dyeXaio- is to be 
 resumed in thought with each 
 of these words. 
 
 8. coy Kara TravTav\ " For the 
 
 general expression" — " for the 
 generic name." 
 
 9. \pfiv\ tovto\ Sc. noielv. 
 
 8eh om. Bodl. An. 
 
 12. eyiyver] Bodl. eyylyver. 
 
 13. Kara ravra toIs avrols] 
 
 Note the resumption. 
 
 Ig. afiiKTOis re Koi dxepdrois] 
 
 Thus the twofold distinction is 
 resumed. Supr. 265 d. 
 
 toIs airots — iv rco Xdyco] 
 
 " Dividing by means of these 
 same differences the care of 
 herds also, we should have 
 comprehended in the terms of 
 our definition alike the present 
 
 kingship (ttjv vvv ftacriXeiav) and 
 
 the royal dignity which existed 
 in the time of Kronos." Al- 
 though the former term ex- 
 cluded one of these, that now 
 employed includes them both. 
 
 I 6. dye\aiOKoiJ.iKT)V -rjs] A Va- 
 rious reading in both places is 
 -vofXLK-. The word dyeXaioKOfiiKrj 
 
 is of course invented for the 
 occasion. dye\aioic6fios would 
 be derived, like jWoko/xos (v. 
 supr. 261 d), from Kopelv or ko- 
 uLCeiv, in the sense of " tend- 
 ing." 
 
 " If the name had been thus 
 expressed under the form of 
 tendance, we clearly should not 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 75 
 
 have in- 
 cluded the 
 Divine and 
 human 
 
 Hovereigns 
 under one 
 form. 
 
 ij6. tyjv eirl Kpovov (3ao-iXelav 7repieiXt](f)6Tes dv rjpev we bould 
 o/jloicos 1 ev tco Xoyco. 
 
 NE. 212. <\>aiveTaC &tco 8e av rl to fieTa tovto ; 
 aE. ArjXov otl XeyOevTos ovtco tov ttjs dyeXaio- 
 
 b K0/JLIK7]? OVOfJLaTO? OVK OCV TCOT iyeveO' Tj/MV TO TWOS 5 
 
 dfMpiafirjTe'LV cos oi)8 eiTineXeia to irapdirav eaTiv, 
 coawep tot€ Sikglicos 7]/JL(pLcr(3r}Tr)0r) /irjSe/iiav dvai 
 Te^yrjv ev r]plv d^lav tovtov tov OpeirTiKOv rrpocr- 
 prmoLTOs' el 5' ovv tls elr], rroXXols upoTepov a\)Tr}<s 
 kcu p.aXXov 7rpocn]K€iv rf tlvl tcov fiacriXeaiv. i 
 
 NE. 20. 'Op6m. 
 
 HE. 'YiirLfieXeia be ye avOpwirivqs (TVfLlrdcrrjs kol- 
 vcovia? ovSe/ucia av edeXrjaetev eTepa fiaXXov /ecu 
 ^TrpoTepa* Trjs fiaaiXiKris (fiavai kcu /cara TrdvTtov 
 c dvOptoircov apxv* 3vai riyyi). i 
 
 NE. 20. Aeyeiy 6p6m. 
 
 HE. Mera Tama 8e ye, to HcoKpaTe?, dp evvo- 
 odfiev otl 7rpo? avTco 8rj tco TeXei av\ybv av dnjfiap- 
 TaveTO ; 
 
 have been troubled with the 
 objection that there was no 
 sort of care of men, as it was 
 then fairly objected that we 
 had no art amongst us which 
 merited this attribute of nur- 
 ture, and, moreover, if there 
 was, there were many who 
 might claim a share in such 
 an art more easily than a 
 king." 
 
 5. iyeved'] So the Bodleian 
 as well as the Coislinian MS. 
 
 12. 'EiripeXeia be ye Texvrj\ 
 
 MSS. TTpaoTepa : in the Bodl. 
 without any accent. " But 
 there is none" (i. e. no art : 
 rexvrj is understood from what 
 precedes and follows) " which 
 
 rather and sooner than king- 
 craft, would claim to be a 
 mode of tendance of human 
 society as a whole, and to be 
 an art of sovereignty over- 
 taking all men." irporepa for 
 irpaore'pa would be almost re- 
 quired by the context (npoTepov 
 — kol (j.aXKov, supr.) even if any 
 good meaning could be given 
 to the latter word. Stallbaum 
 makes the last word, re'xvrj, the 
 subject, and joins empe'Xeta dp- 
 \rjs — but eVt/xe'Aeia and dp\r] are 
 co-ordinate, and not interde- 
 pendent. 
 
 1 8. irpos avTco — t<b reXei] The 
 
 former error has been detected 
 in an early stage of the process 
 
 L 2 
 
76 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 i!i 
 
 error of 
 
 i o divide 
 this. 
 
 NE. 20. To iroiov ; p. 27 
 
 SE. To8e, tos^ ap el kou 8Levorjdrjp.ev o tl p.a- 
 \iara rrjs 8i7ro8os dye'Xrj? elvai riva OpeiTTLKrjv 
 T<zyv~f)v, ovhev tl p.aXXov rjfxas e'dei fiacriXiK-qv av- 
 ti-jv evOvs koll TroKiTiKrjv a>9 dTTOTereXeo'fievrjv irpocr- 
 ayopeveLv. 
 
 NE. SO. Tl mv ; 
 
 SE. \\pu)Tov pjev, o ^Aeyo/jLev*, rovvop.a fxera- 
 crKevcoprjaacrOai, 7rpb? rrju eirLp.eXeLav pLaXXov irpoa- d 
 ayayovra? rj ttjv rpo(])rji>, eirecra ravTr/v refiveW ov 
 yap cr/jLiKpas av eyoi Tfxrjcrei? en. 
 
 NE. 20. IW; 
 
 of division : that now to be 
 named is an omission with 
 which we were chargeable at 
 the close. Supr. 267 c. 
 
 (18.) crv^vov 8irjpaprdveT0 ] 
 
 "We erred largely." Cf. Phsedr. 
 
 257 c : wxybv 8iapaprdvei?. 
 
 2. ToSe — 7rpocrayop€veiv ] 
 
 " This was our mistake, that it 
 might be said (apa) that how- 
 ever clear we were as to the 
 existence of a nurturing art, 
 we were not therefore justified 
 in at once calling this by the 
 names of ' kingcraft' and 'state- 
 craft,' as if perfectly defined." 
 
 7. Ti firjv ;] Sc. ?8« ; " Why, 
 what ought we to have done 1" 
 See note on « prjp ; supr. 
 
 258 b. 
 
 8. UpcoTOv pev o *Xeyopev*] 
 Bodl. All. eXeyopev : cett. o eXey- 
 opev. Cf. Rep. 3, 402 C : ap' 
 ovv, o Xeyw, irpbs 8ea>v, ovtcos 
 
 ov8e povcFLKoi rrpoTepov eo~6pe6a . 
 
 lb. 5; 464 C : dp' ovv o&x, oirep 
 \eyoa, rd re 7rp6o~8ev elprjpeva /cat 
 rd vvv Xeyopeva en pdXXov dnep- 
 yd^erai airovs akq6ivovs (pv- 
 
 Xanas ; Legg. 3, 68 1 b : els rovs 
 iraihas cmorvTvovpevovs Kal naidoov 
 Traidas, b Xiyopev, tftcetv k.t.X. 
 
 Compare Theset. 188 c : 6' fy- 
 rovpev : where Bodl. An. give 
 e{j)Todfiev. 
 
 p.eTao~Kevcopr]0-ao-dai] Sc. e8ei. 
 
 " We ought first, as we are 
 now saying, to have remo- 
 delled the name." The word 
 is ana^ Xeyopevov, and it is a 
 little difficult to catch the exact 
 shade of association which sug- 
 gested it. The literal meaniug 
 is " to rearrange furniture :" 
 and the word is perhaps chosen 
 because this step is prepara- 
 tory to the real business in 
 hand, since names are the fur- 
 niture or utensils (o-Kevrj) of 
 thought. Cf. Rep. 7, 540 e : 81a- 
 
 crKevcopr]o~ovTat. ttjv eavraiv itoXiv. 
 
 9. enipeXeiav] The word is 
 used technically by Aristotle, 
 
 Pol. VII. 14 '. o~xe86v 8r/ iravra 
 ravra avpfiaivei Kara plav inipe- 
 Xeiav. 
 
 10. TavTT)v] Sc. ttjv ovtco pera- 
 vopao~pevr]v (^e7ripeXrjTi.Krjv) re^vrjv. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 77 
 
 jff6. HE. 'Hi re roy ^etof eu> 7rof 8ieiX6p.e6a vop.ea 
 
 XCt>/3i? KOa TOi/ avOpWTTLVOV eiT ip.eXr\Tr\V . 
 NE. SO. 'O/D&Sff. 
 
 HE. Av0i<? Se ye ttjv a.7rovep.rj6elaav e7rip.eArjTiKr)v 
 8iXa rep.veiv avayKcuov rjv. 1 
 
 NE. 212. T/w ; 
 
 AE. Tcp (SlOLLGi T€ KCU 6KOVCTIG). 
 
 NE. 20. T/ftJ; 
 
 HE. Kcet ravTT} irov to irporepov apaprdvovTes 
 e evrjOearepa tov deovro? eh tolvtov fiacriXea kcu tv- 
 pavvov Ijvve'Oepev, avopoioTarovs ovtols avrovs re kcu 
 tov rr\<s apyfjs eKarepov rpoirov. 
 
 NE. 20. 'AAifflJ. 
 
 HE. NOj> 8e ye ttolXlv eTra.vop6ovp.evoi, KaOdirep 
 ehrov, ttjv av0pa>7rlvr)v e7rip.eAr)TiKr)v 8t)(a Sicupcop-eOa, 1 
 TW fiialcp T€ /ecu eKOvaiw ; 
 
 NE. 20. I1gu>i> /zeV ovv. 
 
 HE. Kcu T?)y /xeV ye irov tcov fiialcov TvpavviKrjv, 
 tyjv 8e eKovaiov kcu eKovaicov SlttoSoov dyeAcuoKopuKrjv 
 
 We should 
 have dis- 
 tinguished; 
 
 first, the 
 
 Divine 
 
 Shepherd 
 
 from the 
 human 
 ruler, and 
 then, the 
 king of a 
 willing 
 people from 
 the tyrant 
 ofunwilling 
 subjects, 
 than which 
 no differ- 
 1 ence can be 
 greater. 
 
 I. r Hi re— ASffa fie ye] The 
 
 correspondence of clauses is 
 not strictly preserved. 
 
 4. airove^r]6ii(Tav\ I. e. " As- 
 signed to the human ruler." 
 The word is partly suggested 
 by a false echo from vopea. 
 
 6. Tivi eKova-iui] " By what 
 
 mark of distinction 1 That be- 
 tween the compulsory and the 
 voluntary." Cf. 265 d : ra> 
 o-ykttq) kcu — po>vv\i, alib. 
 
 IO. evr)8i<TTepa tov fieowos] 
 
 " With undesirable simplicity:" 
 a simplicity that might cost 
 us dear. Cf. Rep. 3, 409 a : 
 
 evrjSels — Kal eve^aTraTrjTOi vwo 
 tcov ddtKcov. lb. IO, 598 d. 
 
 1 1 . avrovs re kcu tov — Tponov] 
 " Most unlike in themselves, 
 as also the mode of either's 
 government is most unlike." 
 Cf. Symp. 221 d : ohs — ovtoo-1 
 yeyove ttjv droTriav avdpamos, Kal 
 avTos Kai ol \6yoi avTov. 
 
 15. dv6pa>nlvT]u fTTipeXrjTiKrjv] 
 
 " The human art of superin- 
 tendence" as distinguished from 
 the Divine. 
 
 18. ttjv tcov fiiaicov] " The 
 
 superintendence of the violent." 
 The genitives fiiatcov and €kov- 
 o-icov are different, the former 
 pointing to the rulers, the latter 
 to the persons ruled. 
 
 1 9. 7-171/ fie — £aa>v] "That tend- 
 
78 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 But this 
 is not all. 
 Even with 
 the cum- 
 brous help 
 of our 
 " great fa- 
 ble" we 
 have only 
 obtained 
 a shadowy 
 outline of 
 our subject 
 
 (johidp 7rpoa€i7rui>Te? noXiTiKrjv, tov eypvTa av Teyvi-jV p« i\ 
 TavTrjv kou eiripeXetav ovtois ovtol fiacriXea kou ttoXl- 
 
 TLKOV U7TO(f)aLl'(Of.l€0a \ 
 
 NE. 20. Kai Kivdvvevei ye, do £eve, reAeW p. 2; 
 
 sav rjixlv ovtco? e\eiv 1) irep\ tov ttoXltlkov oltto- 
 Seitjis. 
 
 HE. KaAeoy av, co ^coKpare?, rjpiv eyou. Set 8e 
 firj ao\ fiovcp Tama, dXXa KapLoi fxera aov Koivfj 
 ijvvooKelv. vvv 8e Kara ye ttjv e/JLi)v ovtto) (fyaiveraL 
 
 lorekeov 6 fiaaiXevs r\plv a\y)pa eyeiv, aXXa KaOairep 
 avSpiavTonoio), irapa KOLLpov ev'toTe CT7rev8ovTes TrXelco 
 kou p.el£cQ rod SeovTOs eKacrTa twv epycov €7re/x/3aAAo- 
 ixevoi fipadvvovcri, kou vvv rjfiei?, tva 8r) 7rpb? Top b 
 Taxy kou fxeyaXoTrpeiru)? SrjXaHJoupev to ttjs 1 €/x- 
 
 ibTrpoaOev ap.apTr\pa Sie^odov, tw fiaaiXel vofilcravTe? 
 
 ance of animals in herds whose 
 principle is voluntary and 
 whose subjects are bipeds hav- 
 ing free will." 
 
 8. Koivrf] Cf. supr. 260 b : 
 
 tovtov toivvv (tov OfXOVOe'lv) p.1- 
 Xpmep av avToi Koivcova>p.ev, eariov 
 to. ye rav ciXXoov 8o{-dvpaTa ^m- 
 peiv. 258 c : tovto fjht) aov, 
 oifxai, to epyov, S £eve, «XX' ovk 
 etiov yiyverai. 3. Aei ye iir)v — 
 avTo eivai Kai aov. 
 
 9. Kara ye tt)v ep.r)v\ Cf. 
 
 Phileb. 41 b. 
 
 1 1 . ir\eia> <a\ peifa is governed 
 by enenP., and does not agree 
 
 with eKao-ra tcdv epyuv, which is 
 
 governed by (SpaSuvovcri. 
 
 12. enao-Ta to>v epyoiv] Badh. 
 
 conj. to epyep. But there is no 
 need of change if the words 
 are taken alternately, as often 
 in these dialogues, and Bpadw. 
 be transitive : — Bpahvvovo-iv e<- 
 
 acrra twv epyonv entfiBaWofievoi 
 pelfa Kai nXeco Toil deovros. If 
 
 this is thought harsh, I should 
 prefer to read eKao-rois. 
 
 inepfiaWoixevoi ] " Throw- 
 ing in additional material." 
 Cf. Tim. 51 d : ovt eirl \6yov 
 
 firjKet. irdpepyov aK\o fj.rJK.os enep.- 
 
 f3\r]Teov. The middle voice sig- 
 nifies " into their own work." 
 
 13. tva npos T(£ Ta^v Kai peya- 
 
 XoTrpeTTcos] " That not only with 
 speed but with magnificence." 
 
 7rpoy tco Ta%i) SC. SijAcoo-at. npos 
 
 ra raxei would be a more 
 usual expression, but the ad- 
 verb is suggested by the suc- 
 ceeding adverb. 
 
 14. to — Ste|oSov] Stallbaum 
 well compares Tim. 39 d: -rrpbs 
 
 Tr)v tt)<; hiaimvias piprfcrLV (fivo-eoos. 
 
 lb. 506, Hipp. Maj. 300 c. 
 
 15. ftaaiXel] Governed partly 
 by wpe'neiv, partly by noielo-dai. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 79 
 
 77- irpeirtiv peydXa irapafteiy para iroLeiaOaL, Oavpasnov 
 oyKOV dpd/jL€i>oi tov pvOov, ptifyvL tov 8eouTOf rji>ay- 
 KdcrOrjfjLtv avTOV pepu irpoa^prjaaaOaL. Sib paKpo- 
 ripav tt]v diroSeL^Lv TreTTOLrjKapev kcu itolvtws to 
 pvOco re'Aos- ovk iire^efxev, aAA' aTeyyws 6 Aoyos 5 
 c rjpuv wcnrep tjuoov rrjv e^codeu pev 7repiypa(f)7]v eoiKev 
 iKavcios e'xew, tt\v 8e olov toi? (pappaKOis kcu rfj 
 avyKpdau to>v xpuipaTcov Ivdpytiav ovk d.7reiXrj- 
 
 1. VaVfMHTTOV OJKOV TOV flV- 
 
 6ov\ " Taking up in the fable, 
 as it were, a monstrous lump, 
 we have been obliged to use 
 more of it than was good for 
 our purpose." The image of 
 the statuary (or modeller) is 
 continued. But there is also 
 in oyKov dpdfievoi an association 
 from the other meaning of oy- 
 kov aipeiv, to assume a lofty 
 vein. Cf. Soph. Aj. 129 : pijb' 
 
 oyKov aprjs prjdev. 
 
 2. tov (xvdov is a genitive of 
 apposition or of respect. Cf. 
 Protag. 329 a: 8o\ixbv kcito.- 
 Ttivas tov \6yov. 
 
 4. ndvTcos] " With all," like 
 the Homeric ep,irr)s. 
 
 6. So-nep £a>ov] " Like a pic- 
 ture" of some living thing. 
 The illustration passes from 
 statuary to painting. 
 
 7. rfj o~vyKpdo~ti tu>v xpa>pd- 
 rav] " Harmony of colour." 
 Cf. Legg. 6, 768 c: olov vepi- 
 
 ypa(pr] tls e^coBev Trepiyeypappevr] 
 to. pev e'lprjKe, to S' dnoXeiTrei 
 
 o~x*86v. lb. d : to 8e 8\ov kcu 
 duplies irepl evos re kcu irdvTcov 
 
 TOOV KCITO. TT0\lU KCU IToXtTLKrjV 
 
 •ndcrav 8ioiKr)aeo)v ovk eort yeve- 
 o~dai aacpes, rrplv av t) 8ie't-o8os 
 an clpx*j s T< * Te 8evrepa kcu to. 
 p.eo~a kcu TvdvTa peprj tci eavrrjs 
 
 dTro\aftovo-a irpbs tc\os cKpUrjTai. 
 lb. 769 b : KaduTvep faypdcpoav 
 ov8ev iripas e\eiv fj irpaypaTeia 
 
 SoKCL 7tcpl eKCtCTTOV T(OV £&)&)!/, «XX' 
 
 fj tov xp atvflp 1 dnoxpaiveiv, *j 
 tl 8fj KoXovai to toiovtov ol 
 £a>ypd<pa>v Trai8es } ovk civ ttotc pot 
 8okc'i Travirao-Bai Kocrpovaa, wot' 
 enlboaiv prjKer e'xeiv els to ko\- 
 Xico Te kcu (pavepiOTepa yiyveadai 
 
 tu yeypappeva. The question, 
 How far is the requirement 
 of artistic proportion appli- 
 cable to philosophical dis- 
 course"? is partly suggested 
 here, and is fully discussed in 
 the sequel. 
 
 Plato's contempt of the mere 
 artist comes out in the same 
 passage (769 c): evTpipfjs — oi8a- 
 
 p£>s yeyova ttj Toiav-rp Te'xvrj. 
 A0. Kcu ov8ev ye efiXdPrjs. Com- 
 pare Soph. 234. 
 
 8. e'vdpyeiav] " Distinctness." 
 Here, as in Theset. 203 b, 
 the Bodl., with An., has ivepy. 
 — the more familiar word. 
 The word expresses the way 
 in which the parts come out 
 in relief (wore fao\ fipoToi) as 
 the last touches are added to 
 a painting. 
 
 Aristotle uses the same 
 combination of metaphors to 
 describe the necessary imper- 
 
80 
 
 nAATON02 
 
 No great 
 tiling can 
 be made 
 clear with- 
 out exam- 
 ples. Even 
 the nature 
 
 (f)€vm 7rco. ypa(j)r)? 8e koll (rvfiirdcrr}? yeipovpyias p. 27 
 
 Ae'£et kcu Aoya) 8rj\ovv irav (wov iiaWov irpeireL 
 
 tois 8vvapL€vois eweaOac tois <5' aXXois 81a )(€ipovp- 
 yiwv. 
 
 5 NE. 2Q. ToVTO p}v OpOcoS' OTTT) 8e 7)pLU OVWU) 
 
 (pys iKavcos €iprj(r0ai f 81-jXwaov. 
 
 S*E. XaAe7ro//, co 8aip.6i>i€, fir) Trapa8eLypa.cn xpu>- d 
 fievov iKavcos ev8eLKvvo~6ai tl tcov pLeitpvcov . klv8v- 
 vtvei yap r)p,wi> e/caaros- olov ovap el8cos airavra 
 10 ttolvt av ttolXlv coaTrep virap dyvoeiv. 
 
 fection of an Ethical discourse : 
 
 duv8pcos kcu Timcp TcWrjOes e'vbe'i- 
 Kvvcrdcu — to kci\£)s e\ovra rfj 
 7repiypa<pjj. 
 
 For what follows, cf. Gorg. 
 
 450 b : tcov uev ciXKcov Ttxywv 8id 
 Xeipovpyias iariv rj inurrrifirj. 
 
 2. Xe'£ei kcu \6ycp] Xe'£is is 
 
 introduced because Xo'yos does 
 not sufficiently express a pro- 
 cess. 
 
 irap £a>av~\ And therefore 
 human society, which is a liv- 
 ing organism. 
 
 3. roh hwapevois] Governed 
 by brjkovv. 
 
 tols S' aKkois 8ia %eipovp- 
 yia>u] " To the other sort the 
 creatures maybe shewn through 
 works of art." This is a good 
 illustration of Plato's manner 
 of displaying both sides, even 
 when a subject is mentioned 
 by the way, and when one side 
 only is required for his pur- 
 pose. Cf. Rep. 7, 520 e, Legg. 
 1, 632 d : Tois S' aWois rjplv 
 ov8aucbs Icttl KciTcXpavrj. 
 
 7. XaXe7roi/- — ti tcov uei^ovaiv] 
 This remark is preparatory to 
 the example of the art of weav- 
 ing : which, however, is not 
 
 introduced till p. 279, a di- 
 gression on the nature of Ex- 
 ample being put between. The 
 thought is one of frequent 
 occurrence. Phsedr. 262 c : coy 
 vvv ye yjrikcos 7ra>s \eyouev, ov% 
 e\ovTes lKa.vcnrapa8eiyua.Ta. Soph. 
 2l8 C— e : oo~a S' av tcov ueyd- 
 Xcov Set Sianoveludai — irpoTepov 
 ev cruiKpols — Sen/ ueXerdv. /3ov- 
 Xet drjra irepl twos tcov cpavXcov 
 ueTiovTfs ireipadcouev napddeiyua 
 avTo 6io~6ai tov pei(ovos ; In 
 the Laws the use of Example 
 is recognized as a necessary 
 preliminary to discourse. 1,632 
 e : ottcos S' av to 7rpS>Tov S(.e|eX- 
 8couev, ireipao~6ue6a avTO irapd- 
 8eiyua de'uevoi Ka\ roXXa ovtco 
 8iauv8o\oyovvTes irapauvdia ttoit]- 
 aacrdai Trjs 68ov. 
 
 9. olov ovap el8cos dnavTa ] 
 
 Compare Lys. 218 c : kiv8v- 
 
 vevouev ovap ncnXovTTjKe'vai. 
 Theset. 208 b : ovap S17 — eVXov- 
 Tr)o-auev (" In sleep a king, in 
 waking, no such matter"). A 
 similar feeling appears in Phi- 
 
 leb. 1 6 b : ov urjv eaTi KaXXicov 
 686s otiS' av yevoiTO, r/s eyco epa- 
 o-Trjs uev elui del, TroXKaKis 8e ue 
 tj8t] 8iacfivyovo~a eprjuov re Ka\ 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 81 
 
 277. NE. 20. IleSc* tout eiVes* ; 
 
 S*E. Kal yuaA' aroirods eoiKa ye ev rw irapovTt 
 Kivrjaas to ire pi rrj9 €7naT)]/ir)9 iraOos ev rjp.lv. 
 
 NE. 20. f / 8rj ; 
 
 HE. HapaSelyiLiaTOs, a> fiaKapie, av p.01 Kal ro 
 TrapdbeiypLO. avrb deoe'r/Kev. 
 c NE. 20. T7 ovv ; Ae'ye pLrjftev e/xov ye eVe/ca 
 oVo/c^coy. 
 
 EE. AeRreop, hretdrj Kal av ye eroipLos aKoXovOeiv. 
 tovs yap irov iralBas 'ia/xev, orav dpri ypap-parcov 
 epLTreipoi ylyvcovrai — 
 
 NE. 20. To iroiov ; 
 
 aE. Otl tgov arot^eicov eKaarov ev rals fipayy- 
 Tarais Kal paarat9 tcov avXXaftcav iKavcos StaiaOd- 
 vovrai, Kal raXrjOr) (frpd^eiv irepl eKelva Svvarol 
 ^78. yiyvovrai. 
 
 NE. 20. Ilco? yap ov ; 
 
 of example, 
 it would 
 seem, is no 
 exception 
 
 to this rule. 
 
 We know, 
 then, that 
 
 10 children 
 learn to 
 read by 
 being re- 
 ferred from 
 syllables 
 which they 
 cannot 
 spell to 
 others hav- 
 
 J 5 ing the 
 same let- 
 ters, which 
 they al- 
 ready 
 know. 
 
 airopov Karea-Trja-ev : with which 
 compare Legg. 2, 654 e : el Se 
 ravd' rjfias 8ia(pvyovTa ol^rjo-eTai. 
 Phsedo 89 b, C : idv uep ye rjpuv 
 6 Xoyoy reXevTrjUT] kcu jjltj bvvcop.eda 
 avrbv dvafiiaxracrdai. 
 
 3. to ivepl rfjj eTrio~Tr]p.r)s ird- 
 6os~\ Cf. to tjjs 86£t]s ndSos, 
 Theset. 193 d. "After a strange 
 fashion, it would seem, I have 
 now touched upon the expe- 
 l'ience of our minds in regard 
 to knowledge." For the par- 
 ticiple with eoiKa, cf. Xen. Hell. 
 VI. 3, 10 (Passow, Lex. s. v. 
 eoiKa), and for Kivrjaas, cf. infr. 
 
 297 C : KlVTjO-aS TIS TOVTOV TOP 
 
 \6yov. Theset. 163 a : rd 7roAXa 
 
 Kal aTOira TavTa eKivrjo-ap-ev. 
 
 5. IlaoaoVty/iaros] The illus- 
 
 tration to be drawn presently 
 from boys learning their let- 
 ters is an example of what is 
 meant by Example. 
 
 7. fj.rj8ev dwoKvaivJ I. e. 
 
 Don't be afraid of seeming 
 tedious to me. 
 
 9. o-v ye] So also the Bodl. 
 MS., where the omission of ye, 
 noted by Gaisford, is after e'p.ov 
 in the previous line, perhaps 
 caused by Aeye preceding. 
 
 13. ev rats fipaxyraTais Kal 
 pdo-Tais tu>v o-v\\a@5iv ] See 
 the same illustration more 
 fully drawn out in Eep. 3, 402 
 c, where however the notion 
 of syllables is not distinctly 
 present ; Theset. 206 a, 207, 
 208 ; Phileb. 17. 
 
 M 
 
82 FIAAT0N02 
 
 HE. Tavrd de y€ ravra eu dAAai? diJL([)iyi>oovi>re9 p« 27 
 irakiv So^rj re \j/ev8ovrai koll Aoyco. 
 
 NE. 212. Wdvv fJLtv ovv. 
 
 EE. 'A/?' oi)f ot^ coSe pacrrov /cat KuAAtcrrov eVa- 
 5 ye^ avrov? hri ra fir)7rco yiyvojaKO/ieva ; 
 
 NE. 20. n<Sy ; 
 
 HE. 'Ayayety Trpcorov eV i/ceiva ev oty ravra 
 ravra 6p6m eS6£a£ov, dvayayovras Se riOe'vai wapa. 
 ra. pLrj7T(o yiyvcocrKO/uLeva, Ka\ irapafiaXAovras evdeiK- b 
 ^vvvat rrjv avrrjv bp-Oiorryra koI (f)vcriv ev dfAcfrorepai? 
 ovaav rah avfiirAoKah, fxe^pLTrep av iracri roi? dyvo- 
 ovp.evois ra 8oija(p/j.€va dArjOcos wapariOe'/JLeva Sei^Of}, 
 8ei)(6evra 8e, TrapaBeiyfxad' ovrco yiyvo/ieva, iroLrjarj 
 rcov aroLyeiwv irdvrcov eKaarov ev iru-cravs rah avA- 
 1 s Aafiais, ro /xev erepov toy rcov aAAcov erepov ov, ro 
 8e ravrov cos ravrov del Kara ravra. eavrco irpocra- c 
 yopeveaOat, 
 
 NE. 20. Wavrdiracri \iev ovv. 
 
 1. Tavra 8e ye ravra] Cf. rfjv avrrjv opoLorrjra = opoiov ri)s 
 Theset. 207 e : orav — Qealrrjrov avrrjs Ideas Trades. 
 
 ypd(pcov ris Brjra Ka\ ei — ypd^rrj, iv d/Mporepais rals o~vp.7r\o- 
 
 fcal av Qeobapov imx ei p^ v yp<*- *cnts] The same letter in two 
 
 (peiv rav koi et — ypd-ty-y, different combinations or syl- 
 
 2. 86gr] re y\rev8ovTai Ka\ X6ya] lables (i. e. the same idea or 
 The possibility of which two- law in two widely different 
 fold phenomenon has been things). Cf. Soph. 253, 261. 
 proved with some difficulty 1 1 . pexP L7re P — &«x#??] " Until 
 this morning. Soph. 262-264. the things of which they think 
 
 4. paarov kcu KakXicrrov] Sc. truly (supr. iv ols ravra ravra 
 
 ear iv. 6pda>s eHd^afrv) have been shewn 
 
 8. nde'vai] Sc. to iv ols 6p- in comparison with all the 
 
 6a>s i86£a(ov. things which they do not 
 
 IO. rrjv uvttjv Ofxoior-qra Ka\ know." There is a slight al- 
 
 <fivo~tv] "The same kindred lusion to the etymology of 
 
 form and nature." S/ioiorrjs ivapd-8eiyp.a. 
 
 here - 6 fiolov eiSos. Cf. Phaedo 15. to pev erepov — npoaayo- 
 
 77 a : iv&a8e — rrjv avrols dfiot- peveo-$ui] Cf. Rep. 3, 402 C ; 
 
 orrjTa rrjs 8iaya>yrjs de\ e^ovaiv. Theset. 207 ', Soph. 259 d. 
 
I10AITIK02. 
 
 83 
 
 17%. S?E. Ovkovv tovto p.ev ikousco? avpetXy(papei>, otl 
 7rapa.8e1yiJ.aT0s y eo~Ti Tore yevecrts, birorav ov rav- 
 top, ev eWepo) ^Leairaafievco Soljaijopevov 6p6u>s /ecu 
 crvvayOev, irepl emaTepov coy avvdp.(j)w filav aXrjOrj 
 86ljai> drroTeXfj ; 
 
 NE. SO. <J>«fWat. 
 
 3?E. Qavp.dtpLp.ev di> ovv el tolvtov tovto rj/JLCov 77 
 
 ] [enoe it 
 appears 
 that Exam- 
 ple comes 
 into use, 
 when the 
 name 
 element 
 5 rightly dis- 
 cerned in 
 sometliing 
 else, and 
 brought 
 
 2. onorav — aTrore'Kfj^ " When 
 that which is the same in 
 another separate thing, and 
 which is rightly conceived, is 
 brought into comparison, and 
 so effects one true opinion 
 about each of the two things 
 which are thus regarded in 
 one view." 
 
 3. biea-TTaa/JLevcp ] Cf. Soph. 
 2 53 d : fiiav I8eau 8 id noXXav, 
 cvos CKacrrov Keipevov X w I'^ s j 
 ■navTrj 8iarerape'vr]v. 
 
 4. avvaxOev] A technical 
 word. Cf. Phaedr. 266 b : tS>v 
 diaipcaecov Kcti <7vvaymya>v. 
 
 ircp\ cadre pov a>s <rvvdp(pa — 
 dnoreXf]] Have completed one 
 true opinion respecting the 
 several objects, and combined 
 them in one conception. 
 
 7. Qavjxdfaifiev — -dyi/oet] " Will 
 
 it seem wonderful then if our 
 mind is naturally liable to the 
 same infirmity in relation to 
 the first elements of things, 
 and sometimes in some sub- 
 jects is firm and settled about 
 each element by the help of 
 truth ; but at other times and 
 in other subjects wanders up 
 and down them all : and forms 
 right opinion of some of them 
 here and there amongst the 
 combinations" (apjj ye ny rav 
 crvyKpdcreav. cf. supr. 275 d: 
 ravrrjs 717?), or, " forms right 
 
 opinion of some things here 
 and there even in the com- 
 binations ;" but when they are 
 transferred to the long and 
 difficult (syllables) complexities 
 of real life, is unable to re- 
 cognize the same 1" For aw- 
 
 io-rarai — (peperai, cf. the ac- 
 count of opinion in Tim. 37 a, 
 43, 44 ; and Phaedr. 265 c : 
 laas pev dXrjdovs rivos ecpimrope- 
 voi, rdxu- 8' av kcli dXkoae Trapa- 
 (pepopevoi. lb. 262 a. 
 
 Compare the language of 
 Bacon in recommending a dif- 
 ferent kind of inquiry. Ad- 
 vancement of Learning (quoted 
 by Mr. Ellis in General Preface 
 to the Philosophical Works, 
 p. 26) : " The forms of sub- 
 stances, I say, as they are now 
 by compounding and trans- 
 planting 'multiplied, are so 
 perplexed as they are not to 
 be inquired ; no more than it 
 were either possible or to pur- 
 pose to seek in gross the forms 
 of those sounds which make 
 words, which by composition 
 and transposition of letters are 
 infinite. But on the other side 
 to inquire the form of those 
 sounds or voices which make 
 simple letters is easily com- 
 prehensible, and being known 
 induceth and manifesteth the 
 forms of all words which cou- 
 
 M 2 
 
84 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 into com- 
 parison 
 with the 
 thin is 
 
 creates a 
 single true 
 judgment 
 
 including 
 both the 
 things. 
 Now this 
 applies 
 equally to 
 the ele- 
 ments of 
 universal 
 Being : in 
 contem- 
 plating 
 which the 
 soul is like 
 a child 
 learning to 
 read. 
 Let us, 
 then, 
 choose an 
 example, 
 which will 
 at once 
 
 V /l, X ? ) ( f )V(r€l TTtp\ rd rcov irdvrcov aroiyeia ireirovOvia p- 
 rore pev vn dXifQeias irep\ ev eKaarov ev tictl cjvv'l- 
 ararai, rore 8e irepl airavra ev erepois av (peperai, 
 KOi ra ptev avrdtv dpfj ye ttxj rcov avyKpaaecov opOco? 
 5 8o^d^ei, perartOepeva 6° ei? rds rcov irpayparcov 
 {laKpas koll pLi] pa.8lovs avXXafia? ravra ravra iraXiv 
 dyvoel ; 
 
 NE. 20. Kou 6avp.aarov ye ov8ev. 
 SE. Ylco? '\ydp'\, co (piXe, 8vva.iT av ri? dp\o- 
 io pevos diro Sotji]? \j/ev8ov9, eiri ri rrj? dXr)6eias /cat 
 fiLKpov fiepos dtyiKopLevo? KrrjaaaOai (ppovrjcnv ; e 
 
 NE. 212. 2)(e<5oi' ov8apcos. 
 
 £?E. Ovkovv ravra el ravrrj rretyvKtv, ov8ev 8rj 
 
 7rXt] ppeXoi/xev av eyco re Ka\ av rrpcorov \xev kmyei- 
 
 i$p{]cravres oXov 7rapa8elyparos I8elv rrjv cpvcriv ev 
 
 (TpuKpcp Kara ptepos dXXco irapaSelypan, perd 8e 
 
 sist and are compounded of 
 them. In the same manner, 
 to inquire the form of a lion, 
 of an oak, of gold — nay, of 
 water, of air — is a vain pur- 
 suit ; but to inquire the forms 
 of sense, of voluntary motion, 
 of vegetation, of colours, of 
 gravity and levity, of density, 
 of tenuity, of heat, of cold, and 
 all other natures and qualities, 
 which like an alphabet are not 
 many, and of which the es- 
 sences upheld by matter of all 
 creatures do consist, — to in- 
 quire, I say, the true forms of 
 these, is that part of meta- 
 physique which I now define 
 of." 
 
 1. TO. TWV TTOLVTCOV OTOl^Sla] 
 
 " The alphabet of things," i. e. 
 the ideas. Cf. Theaet. 201 sqq. 
 
 2. to re pev — (peperai] Cf. 
 
 Phileb. 15 : rore pev iiri Barepa 
 kvkXcov kol crvpcpvpcov eh ev, rore 
 8e iraXiv aveXlrranv nal 8iape- 
 pifav. 
 
 9. na>? tyap+] Stallbaum 
 is probably right in conj. nas 
 ap—. 
 
 15. SXov] The "whole" is 
 often put by Plato for the 
 universal, to which Kara pepos 
 is here opposed as the par- 
 ticular. Cf. Rep. 6, 491 c: 
 
 Aaftov Toivvv, rjv S' eyco; oXov 
 
 avTov 6p6ws. Theset. 178 a: 
 
 el 7rep\ iravros tls rov e'ldovs 
 epcorar] k.t.X. lb. 1 82 b : Kara 
 peprj ovv aKOve. 
 
 16. aXXa] Other, as the par- 
 ticular is other than the ge- 
 neral. 
 
 per a 8e ravra peXXovres — ] 
 
 " Intending, however, after- 
 wards to bring the same na- 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 85 
 
 279 
 
 278. ravra p.eXXovT€?, em to tov fiaaiXem peytaTov ov 
 ravTov eldos air eXaTTOVcov (jjepovre? 7ro0ev, Sea 
 rrapadeiypaTo? hrij(eLpeTv av ty)v tcov Kara ttoXlv 
 Oepaireiav Tiyyr) yvcopl^eiv, tva virap avT bveiparos 
 r)plv yiyvrjTai. ; 
 
 NE. 20. YIdvv p}v ovv 6p6m. 
 
 ftE. YlaXiv 8rj top tpirpocrOev Xoyov dvaXrjTTTeov, 
 &)? lireiSr] tco (3ao-iXtKco yc.vet rrjs 7rep\ ra<s 7roXets 
 eirip.eXeias ap(j)io-fir)TOvai ptvploi, Sel Sr) Travras diro- 
 
 yGOpiQELV TOVTOV? KCLL pOVOV tKELVOV XlTTtlv. KCU 7TpOS 
 
 tovto 8rj irapadeiypaTOs ecpapiev 8eiv tlvos r)puv. 
 
 NE. 20. Kai pcdXa. 
 
 SE. T/ Srjra irapafteiypd tl? av, eyov Tr)v avrrju 
 ^ttoXltlkyj^ 7rpaypaT€iav, apiKporarov wapaOepevo? 
 h Ikclvcds av evpoi to ^rjTovpievov ; fiovXei 7rpos Aios, 
 d> ^coKpares, el per) tl Trpoyeipov eTepov eyoptev, aXX' 
 ovv tj]v ye v(pavTiKrjv irpoeXcopeOa ; Ka\ TavTrjv, el 
 So/cel, per) Trdcrav ; airo^prjaet yap 'laca? r) 7rep\ to. e/c 
 tcov epicov v(paap.aTa' ra^a yap av rjp.lv Ka\ tovto to 
 pepos avTrj? p,apTvprjaei€ irpoaipeOev o fiovXopeOa. 
 
 NE. 20. Tlyapov; 
 
 illustrate 
 for us tins 
 poird of 
 method, 
 
 and pre- 
 pare the 
 way for a 
 more en- 
 
 5 lightened 
 view of the 
 States- 
 man's 
 office. 
 Reverting 
 then to 
 what has 
 been pre- 
 
 IO viously 
 said, that 
 we must 
 try to clear 
 away from 
 the King 
 the crowd 
 of rival 
 artists, we 
 select as an 
 
 j - example 
 the art of 
 weaving 
 woollen 
 cloth. 
 
 ture from some lesser subject 
 to bear on the most important 
 nature of the king, and to 
 endeavour — ." The construc- 
 tion is determined by a sort 
 of attraction from the previous 
 participle. 
 
 I . piyicrrov ov ravrbv ei'So?] 
 Cf. Kep. 4, 435 a : o ye ravrov 
 av tis Trpooenroi peiifiv re Kai 
 eXarrov. 
 
 3. rav Kara. noXiv] MaSC. 
 
 4. vrrap avr oveiparos] Cf. 
 supr. 277 d. 
 
 7. tov epTvpoo-Qtv Xoyov ava- 
 
 XtjtttIov] P. 268 d : ew? av tovs 
 TrepiKe^vpevovs avra ku\ rrjs 
 avvvoprj? avra avTiTVOLOvptvovs 
 irepuXovres Ka\ x a> pL°~ avTes " 7r ' 
 eVeiVcov Kadapov p.6vov eKelvov 
 a.T;o<pr)va>p.ev. Also 275 — 2 7 7- 
 
 IO. eKeivov] r'ov fiaaiXea im- 
 plied in rw (3acriXiKcp yevei. 
 
 14. *TToXlTtKrj*] MSS. TToXlTl- 
 
 k\]v. The correction occurred 
 also to Ast and Stallbaum. 
 
 20. paprvprjaeie Ttpoaipe6ev ] 
 
 The participle, as in npityei 
 pr)6ev, supr. 269 c, and the 
 like. 
 
86 
 
 FIAATQNOS 
 
 3E. Tt 8i]Ta ov, KaOanep ev tow ep7rpoa0(v 76- p. 
 pvovTts pe'py peptov eKaaTov 8ir)povp€0a, kou vvv 
 nepl vcpavTLKifv tcwtov tovto eSpdcrapev, kou Kara c 
 8vvapiv o Tt pdXiara 8lu fipa^etov Ta\v ttolvt eVeA- 
 5 OovTts iraXiv ijXOopev eVt to vvv xPWipov ; 
 
 NE. 212. Urn Xeyus ; 
 
 SE. Avti)v ti]v 8ie£o8ov airoKpLCTLv aoL iroLrj- 
 crofxat. 
 
 NE. 20. KaXXiaT ehres. 
 io ^E. "Eart to'lvvv iravTa rjpuv biroaa Srjpiovpyov- 
 pcev kou KTCopeda, tol pev eW/ca tov iroielv tl, to. 8e 
 tov pj] 7ida\eLv dpLWTrjpia' kou t&v dpvvTrjplcov rd 
 pcev dXe^KpdppaKa kou Oeia kou dv0pd>7rtva, ra 8e cl 
 TrpofiXrjpaTa' tcov 8e irpofiXrjpdTcnv Ta plv irpbs tov 
 iSTroXepLOv birXicrpLaTa, Ta 8e (ppdypaTa' kou tgov 
 (ppaypaTcov Ta pcev irapair^TacrpaTa, Ta 8e 7rpb? 
 
 I . Ti ov — ihpdaap.ev ] Cf. 
 
 Soph. 251 e. Phileb. 54 c. 
 
 3. Kara bvvap.LV — Sta /3pax«W] 
 
 This is fulfilled in the follow- 
 ing sentence, in which the 
 method of dichotomies is ex- 
 emplified as it were in short 
 hand. Perhaps also there is 
 here a sly anticipation of 
 the length to which the illus- 
 tration is allowed to run, 
 which is made the occasion of 
 comment afterwards. 
 
 7. AvTTJV TTOll)(TOjXai ] Cf. 
 
 Soph. 250 a : Treipdaopai 8pav 
 tovto epcoTcov ae KaBcnrep itceivovs 
 tots, \va apa tl kol Trpoicopev. 
 
 10. hrjp.Lovpyovp.eu kci\ KT«>p.e6a\ 
 
 7T01TJTLK1] and KTTJTLKTj (Soph. 2 I 9) 
 
 are thus combined. 
 
 1 3. d\e£i(pdpp.aKa kol 6ela Km 
 
 dvdpamLva] Preventives divine 
 and human — in the form of 
 
 talismans or of drugs. 
 
 14. to>v 8e — o-vv8erd] "De- 
 fences from the weather are 
 housing and body-shelter : of 
 the latter sort are mats and 
 envelopments ; which are of 
 one piece or of several. Those 
 of several pieces are stitched 
 or otherwise compacted, of 
 vegetable fibre or of hair or 
 wool : and of these some are 
 felted together with the help 
 of water and earth, while some 
 are compacted of themselves." 
 
 16. Trapo.ireTdo-p.aTa] " Cui'- 
 
 tains — to shut out the view." 
 Hesycll. : TtapaTreTdo-paTa, irapa- 
 K.a\vp.p,aTa. Cf. Prot. 316 e : 
 tols Texvais TavTais 7rapa7T€TU- 
 o-paaip ixprjo-avTO. The word is 
 used also by Herodotus of the 
 Persian hangings found in the 
 tent of Mardonius at Platsea. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 87 
 
 279. )(€ificdva? kou Kavjiara d.Xe^i]Ti]pia' tcov Se ciXe^ifTrf- 
 picov to. fiev areydafiara, tcl Se o-KeiroxrpoTa' kou 
 tcov aKeiracrfiaTcov inroirtTacr flora fiev dXXa, irepi- 
 KaXvpLfxara Se krepa' irepiK.aXvfifid.Tcov Se to fiev 
 
 e bXoayio-Ta, avvOera Se erepa' tcov Se avvQercov to. 
 fiev TprjTa, to Se avev Tprjcrecos crvvSeTa' kou tcov 
 aTprjTcov to, fiev vevpiva (fivTcdv eK yr/?, to. Se Tply^iva' 
 tcov Se Tpiyivcov to. fiev vSaai kcll yfj KoXXifTa, to Se 
 avTa. avTois crvvSeTa. tovtolctI 8r) toI? e/c tcov eavTois 
 avvSovfievcov epyaaOelatv dfivvTifpiois koI aKeiracr- 
 fiacn to fiev ovofia \fio.Tia eKaXecra/iev ttjv Se tcov 
 IjiaTLCov fiaXiCTTa eTrifieXovfievrjv Te^vrjv, cocnrep tot€ 
 
 >• ttjv Trj? 7roXeco9 TroXiTiKrjv etrro/iev, OVTCO Kal VVV TO.V- 
 tt\v irpoueiTTCOfiev air ai>Tov tov TrpdypaTos IfioTL- 
 ovpyiKrjv' (pcdfiev Se kou vcpavTiKr/v, ocrov erri tyj tcov 
 IfiaTLcov epyaala fieyiaTOv rjv fiopiov, /it]8ev Sicupepeiv 
 
 Protectionw 
 are prophy- 
 lactii 
 defences. 
 Defences 
 
 are armour 
 and bar- 
 riers. Bar- 
 
 5 riers are 
 screens and 
 weather- 
 stops. Wea- 
 ther- 
 are shelter 
 and clothes. 
 Clothes are 
 rugs and 
 integu- 
 ments. In- 
 teguments 
 are of one 
 piece or 
 composite. 
 The compo- 
 site are 
 stitched or 
 otherwise 
 
 j r combined. 
 Those un- 
 stitched 
 are of 
 
 7. The genitive (pvrcov de- 
 pends on ear), which is to be 
 supplied, but at the same time 
 defines more particularly the 
 idea of veipivov, " of fibres, 
 from plants." 
 
 9. ro^Toto-t] Several MSS. 
 have Tovroiai : but this is a 
 case Avhere the chorior lectio is 
 preferable. 
 
 10. dfivvrripiois ] Cf. Legg, 
 
 1 1, 920 e : 01 to. rav &T)p.iovpy£)v 
 (rco^ovres rexvaicnv erepais dpvv- 
 rrjpiois e'pya. 
 
 15. ocrov] This can hardly 
 mean " Inasmuch as." In 
 Rep. 1, 328 d, which Ast com- 
 pares (Lex. s. v.), 00-ov is 
 distinctly an accusative of 
 measure, and is answered by 
 TocrovTov, which could not be 
 introduced here without de- 
 stroying the sense. And if so 
 
 rendered, the words must be 
 understood to anticipate what 
 is brought out afterwards, 
 that weaving is only a part of 
 the making of clothes. This 
 should be kept in the back- 
 ground here. The word al- 
 ludes to what is said above 
 and explained immediately be- 
 low, that only a part of the 
 art of weaving is concerned 
 with making woollen gar- 
 ments. 279 b: Kal ravTTjv, el 
 8oKel, pr) iracrav k.t.\. This is 
 
 confirmed by rjv. " At least 
 that very large portion of this 
 art which we saw to be for 
 the making of clothes." ocrov 
 therefore limits the subject of 
 
 8t.a(pepeiv. 
 
 eVi] As in Gorg. 463 c : 
 
 TCTTapa ravra popia em rerrapaiv 
 TTpdypao-iv, alib. 
 
88 
 
 ITAATQNQ2 
 
 
 vegetable 
 fibre or of 
 hair. Those 
 
 of hair are 
 compacted 
 with ear tli 
 
 and water, 
 or com- 
 bined of 
 their own 
 substance 
 without 
 such help. 
 These last 
 are called 
 clothing : 
 and the 
 art which 
 tends on 
 these may- 
 be called 
 cloth- 
 making : 
 which dif- 
 fers from 
 the weav- 
 ing of wool, 
 as the King 
 and the 
 Statesman 
 
 ttX))v ovofiaTi ravT)]? r?/9 IpariovpyiK)]?, KaOanep p. 28 p: 
 
 KOLKU TOT€ T)]V f3a(TlXlKy]V T?/9 TToXlTLKl^. 
 
 NE. SO. 'OpOorard ye. 
 
 3E. To //era tovto 8rj avXXoyiaojp.eOa, otl ttjv 
 5 ipaTioov v(f)avTiKi)v ovTco piiOelcrdv tls rd)( dv 'lkolvcos 
 etprjaOaL So^eie, p.rj 8vvdp.evo? ^vvvoelv otl twv pev b 
 lyyvs ijvvepycov ovrrco dicopicrrai, rroXXcov 8e eTepcov 
 ^vyyevcov direp.eplo-6y). 
 
 NE. 20. YIolcov, eiwe, tjvyyevcov ; 
 to 3?E. Ov\ eowov rots \e)(6a.criv, coy (palvec ttoX.lv 
 ovv -ffeoiKev eiravureov dp^opevov thro TeXevTrjs. el 
 ydp ^vvvoets ttjv olfceioTTjTa, ti)v fxev 8terep.op.ev drr 
 avT-qs vvv Srj, ttjv tcov arpcoparcov avvflecnv, irepi- 
 (3oXf) yropl^ovre^ kou v7ro(3oXfj. 
 '5 NE. 20. Mav0dvco. 
 
 SE. Kcd pj]V TT)V €K TOW XlVCOV KOU aTTapTCOV KOU C 
 
 2. KCLKil r6re\ 259 b, c. See 
 also 274 e. 
 
 4. avWoyicraipeda] " Let US 
 
 reflect." " Let us think, put- 
 ting together what has been 
 said." Or, perhaps, " Com- 
 paring this argument with the 
 preceding." As the definition 
 of the king seemed to be com- 
 plete, at the end of the first 
 series of divisions, so might 
 the definition of the weaver at 
 this point. Yet neither has 
 been distinguished from his 
 greatest rivals. 
 
 10. ttoKiv cvv 1"T eoixev inavi- 
 reovj Either cos eomev or inavL- 
 
 reov elvai seems to be required. 
 
 11. dp^opevov drrd reXevTrjs] 
 
 " Beginning from the end." 
 As in resuming the " gene- 
 alogy" of the Sophist, 226 a, 
 
 ib. 268. This order is not 
 strictly followed, however, un- 
 less the " end " includes all 
 
 from Kal tcov CTKeiracrpaTcov 
 
 downwards. 
 
 el fjvvvoels ttjv oiKeioTTjTa] 
 Young Socrates' question, Uoicov 
 — £vyyevS>p ; shewed that he 
 had not observed the likeness 
 or kindred, e. g. between eo-drjs 
 
 and arpcopara. 
 
 12. ttjv pev 81eTep.op.ev] pev is 
 
 answered by kol pr)v. 
 
 ttjv pev vnoftdkr] ] " We 
 
 just now cut off from the 
 weaving of garments that of 
 bed clothes, distinguishing 
 them by the one being put 
 under us and the other round. 
 l^.-rrepiftohf) kul v7ro(3o\j}] Supr. 
 vTronerdcrpaTa pev aXAa, nepiKa- 
 \vppara 8e erepa. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 89 
 
 80. iravTcop, birocra ('pvrwv apri vevpa Kara Xoyov tiiro- 
 
 \xev, Srjpuovpyiav iracrav a^e/Ao/xe^* ti~jv t av ttlXi-j- 
 
 tlkyjv afpcopiaafieOa /cat Tr/v rfj rprjaei kou pa(Pfj 
 
 ^pap.evr)v avvOeaiv, rjs rj irXeicrTr) aRVTOTO/JUKr). 
 
 NE. 20. Yldvv p}v ovv. \ 
 
 £jE. Kai Toivvv T7]v twv oAoo-^/crra)^ aK€7racr/id- 
 
 T(dv Oepcnrelav, StpjuarovpyiKyis, /cat ray tw areyaa- 
 
 /mx,tcoi>, oaai re kv OLKoSopuKfj kou oXy t6ktovikJj kou 
 
 d lv a'XXai? reyvais peup.aT(Dv <tt€ktikou yiyvovrai) 
 
 avfJL7rdaa9 a<fielXop.€i>, oaai re 7repl ras KXoirds kou 
 
 Tas /3/a irpd^eis SiaKcoXvriKa. epya irapeypvrai Teyyai 
 
 (fipaypLOLTOJV, irepi re yeveaiv e7ri6rjp.aTovpyLas ovaai 
 
 Rat ras twv dvpcofidroiv wrj^ei?, yo/jKpcoriKiis dirovejx- 
 
 I. (pvrcov vevpa — e'lnopev\ Viz. 
 in saying vevpiva (pvrav supr. 
 
 Kara. Xoyou] Following ana- 
 logy. 
 
 8. oaai re — yiyvovrai] I. e. 
 oaai re ev oIko8. k. ok. rexrov. are- 
 KTiKai (or o~Teyao~TLKat) yiyvovrai, 
 Kai oo~ai ev aXkais Texv. pGVfi&Tesv 
 crreKT. yiyv. 
 
 9. pevpdrav o-TeKTiml] "Hous- 
 ing" is not an adequate trans- 
 lation of o-Teyaa-TiKT), as this 
 includes the damming of rivers 
 and the like : " the art of 
 making wind-and-water-tight." 
 Many of the words in this 
 passage are quoted, with others 
 from the Politicus, by Pollux, 
 Onomasticon 7, 208-10, who 
 adds : etre o-irov8d((L>v e'xprjro rols 
 ovopacrtv, ei're Ka\ prj — Xeyco Se, 
 81a to ev eviois ra>v ovopdrcov /3iai- 
 orepov xpV°~@ M - 
 
 IO. ocrai Te — re'xvrjs] "And all 
 the arts which produce pre- 
 ventive barriers, as against 
 theft and violence, such as are 
 the process of lid-making and the 
 
 fixing of doors, being separate 
 portions of the art of joining." 
 The order is oaai re^vai nape- 
 Xovrai — 8iaKcokvTiKa epya cppaypd- 
 
 tuv. The genitive of apposi- 
 tion again recals the language 
 of tragedy. This class was not 
 strictly included in the Trapane- 
 rdapara of the previous enume- 
 ration. 
 
 13. yopcpcoTiKrjs airovepr)6e1o-8ai 
 popia Texvrjs] Either " set apart 
 as portions of the joiner's art," 
 or " having had assigned to 
 them several portions of the 
 joiner's art." For the latter, 
 cf. infr. 281 c: /xeyuXa Se {^pn) 
 Ka\ acpiaiv avrais cnrovepovcrai. 
 
 The use of the passive would 
 then be analogous to rriarev- 
 opai ti, " I am entrusted with 
 something" — a trace of which 
 occurs as early as Plat. Ep. I. 
 309 a : biomcov ri)v vperepav ap- 
 Xr)v iremarevpevos rravrccv pd- 
 Xto-ra. Other instances in 
 which a noun which would 
 have followed the active verb" 
 
 differed, in 
 aame only. 
 But though 
 the di fini 
 
 tion is spe- 
 cious, we 
 see "ii re- 
 flection 
 
 that the 
 ari baa still 
 to be dis- 
 tinguished 
 from those 
 most akin 
 to it. Se- 
 veral kin- 
 dred arts 
 have in- 
 ' deed been 
 parted off, 
 such as the 
 making of 
 bedclothes, 
 of skins, of 
 linen cloth, 
 
no 
 
 riAATONOS 
 
 and rush 
 matting, of 
 Fi It, of 
 Bhoes, of 
 
 houses and 
 dams, of 
 
 lids and 
 
 doors, of 
 armour, all 
 of which 
 
 are in- 
 cluded in 
 the cate- 
 gory of 
 defences. 
 The art of 
 magical 
 charms was 
 early re- 
 jected, so 
 that one 
 only art, 
 that of de- 
 fying wea- 
 ther by the 
 production 
 of a woollen 
 
 ■>]$eurai fiopta T€)(yrj?' rrjv re oTrXoTrouKi-jV (hrtTepo- p. 2> 
 fji€0a, fxeydXr]? kcu iravroias rrj? irpo^XrifxarovpyLKrj^ 
 T/iTJ/ia ovcrav dvvdfitw' kou Sr) kol t?]v payevTiKrjv 
 ttjv irepl to. dXe^KpdppaKa kolt dp^us evdvs enw- e 
 5 piadpeda ^vpTracrav, /cat XeXoiirapev, &>£ 86{jcufiev av, 
 avri)i> ti-jv ^-jTi-jOeiaav cljxvvtlk^v yeifiwvwv, ipeov irpo- 
 /3A?}/xoctos > epyao-TiKijv, ovop.a hi vtyavTLKrjv M^Ouaav. 
 
 NE. 20. "Eot/ce yap ovv. 
 
 SE. 'AAA' ovk earl tt(o reXcof, co ttou, tovto Xe- 
 voXeypevov. 6 ydp ii> dpyjl T V? T ^ v ipaTtcDV ipyaaia? 
 dirTOfxeuos tovvclvt'iov v(j)r) Bpav (patveTai. 
 
 NE. 20. Um ; P- 2 
 
 SE, To plv tt)s v(prJ9 avfnrXoKi] tls earl wov. 
 
 in the dative case is made the 
 subject of the the passive verb, 
 are Legg. n, 925 e: robs «rt- 
 
 TdTTUpiVOVS. lb. 926 a: Tols VOflO- 
 
 BeTovptvois (masc). lb. 937: eav 
 c7n<TKr](j)dT], Rep. 1, 337 a: eXeel- 
 <r6ai paXXov — fj xaXeTruiveadai. 
 
 For a generalization similar 
 to those in the present pas- 
 sage, cf. Legg. 12, 944 c : <ai- 
 pol — Xv&ecos — vecos r) £g>ou twos, 
 ovs ivrovovs re kol viro£d)pa.Ta Kcii 
 vevpcov €7Tlt6vovs piav ovaav <pv- 
 o~iv tjt,ecnrapptvr]V, 7roXXaxov 7roX- 
 Xols ovdpacn Trpoaayopevnvcriv. 
 
 3. payevTiKrju ] The word 
 nayeta and the almost equally 
 rare word ake£«pdppaKov occur 
 in Ale. I. 122 a, 132 b. 
 
 There is a slight inaccuracy 
 of reference in putting toge- 
 ther the 6\6arxi<TTa (TKeTrdrrpaTa 
 and the a-reydapara, the former 
 of which came after, while the 
 latter preceded, the mention 
 
 of CTTpcopara. 
 
 7. Xexdelaav] The participle 
 is added, as in tragic poetry, 
 
 to round the sense. Cf. Soph. 
 Trach. 1 : dpxeuos tpavels. 
 
 9. reXeou XeXeypevov ] Cf. 
 SUpr. 271 a : adijXov biecpdeipero. 
 
 1 1 . tovvuvtlov vcpfj ] If we 
 
 compare Soph. 226 b, where 
 the process of carding is made 
 the symbol of the Elenchus 
 (a figure which may have 
 partly suggested this), it will 
 not seem fanciful to suppose 
 an allusion here to the logical 
 process of biaipeais, which, as 
 was shewn in the Sophist, is 
 imperfect without the converse 
 process of crvvaycoyrj or crvp- 
 irXoKrj. The work of the 
 Statesman also has these two 
 elements, in common with 
 every art that is based on 
 knowledge. Cf. infr. 308 c : 
 
 Trdaa eTTLCTTrjprj iravra)(ov ra pev 
 poxBqpd els Bvvapiv dnofidXXei, 
 ra 8' eVtr?;Seta kcu XPW T ^ L eXa- 
 /3ev, eK tovtcov 8e Kai opolcov Kai 
 avopoioov ovrav, ndw els ev aura 
 ^vvdyovcra, piav tlvo, Bvvapiv kcu 
 IBeav Brjpiovpyel. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 91 
 
 ?8i. NE. 20. Nat. 
 
 HE. To Be ye rwv avvearcorcav koll crv/JL7re7riXy- 
 \xev(x>v BlolXvtlki). 
 
 NE. 20. To irolov By ; 
 
 HE. To r^s* rod ^aivovros Teyyys epyov. ?) tyjv 
 ^avTLKi]v ToXjja]aofiev v(f)ai>TLKr)i> koll tov ^dvrrjv tv? 
 bvTa v§avTr)v KaXeiv ; 
 
 NE. 20. OvdcLfAW. 
 
 HE. Kat /,i?)z/ r?/i> ye av aTy/iovo? epyaariK^v koll 
 KpOK-qs ei TL9 v(j)avT lio)v 7rpocrayop€veL, irapdBo^ov re 
 b koll \j/evSo? ovofia XeyeL. 
 
 NE. 20. Has yap ov ; 
 
 HE. Tt 5c'; Ki>a(j)€VTiKr)i> avparaaav koll tt)i> 
 txKecTTLKiiv irorepa p.i]BejJLLav eiTLpeXeLau firjBe tlvol 
 OepojKelav eaOrJTO? dtofxev, i] koll ravras irdcras d)S 
 vcpavTLKCL? Xe^ojiev ; 
 
 NE. 20. OvSa/im. 
 
 HE. 'AAAa fXTju tt]9 ye Oeponrelas dp.(f)La(3y]Ti , j- 
 (tovctlv avTOLL ^vparao~aL koll rr}? yeveaecDS TYjS TCDP 
 ipLoiTLGiv rfj tyjs v<fiai>TLKr}? SuvdfieL, [xeyLcrrop \xlv 
 fiepos eKelvrj BLBovaaL, fieyaXa Be kou a(pl(TLi> clvtqus 
 throvip-ovaaL. 
 c NE. 20. TLdvv ye. 
 
 nairn 
 
 . would 
 
 bi in to be 
 left. 
 
 The defini 
 
 t inn, how - 
 
 5 ever, is not 
 yet com- 
 plete. 
 Other pro- 
 cesses be- 
 sides weav- 
 ing are 
 engaged in 
 the making 
 of cloth. 
 
 io Forcarding 
 is not com- 
 bination 
 but^ divi- 
 sion. Nor 
 are spin- 
 ning and 
 weaving 
 to be con- 
 . founded. 
 
 Once more, 
 fullini'; and 
 daruing are 
 processes 
 concerned 
 with cloth, 
 from which 
 weaving 
 must be 
 
 20 distin- 
 guished. 
 Here are 
 several 
 rival arts, 
 whose land- 
 marks must 
 
 2. To 8e ye — SiaAvTiK)';] Sc. 
 to 8e ye ev apxfl rrjs to>v Ipdncov 
 epyaaias bpaspevov earn irpa^is 
 
 8iaXvTLKr]. 
 
 1 3. Kva<pevTiK.i]v\ Cf. Goi'g. 
 491 a: ertevreas re Kai payetpovs 
 \eya>v Kai larpovs ovdev iravei. 
 
 Soph. 227 a. 
 
 1 6. vfpavTLKas ] Cf. Gorg. 
 
 450 b : ti Sjj 7TOT6 Taj aXkas 
 
 re^vas ov p)]TopiKcis KaXe'is, ovo~as 
 
 rrep\ \6yovs, einep tuvttjv prjro- 
 
 * 
 
 piKijv KaXets, f] av 17 nep\ \6yovs ', 
 
 17. Ovdapobs] Sc. vCpavTiKas. 
 Only the latter half of the 
 question is answered : hence 
 Socrates calls attention to the 
 former part, with aX\a pljv — 
 ye—. 
 
 18. rijs — depctnelas ] For 
 
 the construction without nepi, 
 cf. infr. 275 b, 279 a, Phileb. 
 
 2 2 C : tujv VLKr]TT]plcoj> ovk ap- 
 <pio-fr)Tw 7T0) imep vov. 
 
 N 2 
 
be placed 
 with bare. 
 
 To whirl, 
 
 must be 
 addedthoae 
 which forge 
 
 the wea- 
 ver's tools, 
 .and which 
 may be 
 
 \ i.'U I'll Ms 
 
 adminicu- 
 lar. The 
 definition 
 of weaving 
 in wool will 
 not lie com- 
 
 92 IIAAT0NO2 
 
 3E. Ylpo? Toivvv ravTcu? en tos Tu>v tpyaXeiaiv p. 28 28 
 ftilfxiovpyovs Ttxyas, 81 d>v diroTtkeiTai ra tt)$ vcjyrj? 
 epya, SokcIu \pr) to ye crvvairlas elvai irpocrivoir)- 
 oaaOai ttclvtos v(f)ao-paT09. 
 5 NE. SO. 'OpeSrara. 
 
 SE. Ylorepov ovv i)puv b irep\ tyjs vfyavTiKrjs Ao- 
 yos, ov irpoaXopiiOa fiepovs, 'iKavm earat Suopio-- 
 /levo?, lav ap avrrju rwv i7rip.eXeta)V, biroaai irepi 
 Ti)v epeav icrOrJTa, eh rrjv KaAAi(TTr)v kou fxeylaTrjv 
 
 2. 81 Z>v\ Sc. epya\elu>v. 
 
 3. to ye — TTpoo~noit]crao~6ai\ 
 
 " Lay claim to be at least co- 
 operative causes :" cf. dpcpicr- 
 
 j3r]Tr]crovaiv supr. 
 
 7. ov 7rpoei\6pe&a pepovs] An 
 explanatory limitation. " The 
 art of weaving, that part of it 
 which we selected:" supr. 279 
 
 b : tovto to pepos avTrjs irpoai- 
 
 p(6eu. The second noun limits 
 the first, with which it is in 
 apposition : as in such expres- 
 sions as ol 'Adrjualoi ol (TTpaTr]- 
 
 yoi in Thucydides. 
 
 8. onoo-ai — Ti6£>pev~\ The 
 reading of most MSS., els tt]v 
 Ka\\io-Tr)v, is sufficiently de- 
 fended by Soph. 235 a (where 
 see note) ; Tim. 57 e : klvyjo-iv 
 
 be els dvcopa\6TT]Ta del Ti6cbpev. 
 Legg. 867 b : els e'lKova ttov 
 
 6a>p.ev. For the omission of 
 the substantive verb after 
 ottoVos, which frequently hap- 
 pens, cf. infr. 285 a : ■ndvG' 
 onoaa evrexva. The Zurich 
 editors read elcri, which is 
 found in Flor. i. The Bodl., 
 with A, has els yrjv. 
 
 9. els Ttjv KaWicTTrjv kciI pey'ia- 
 
 ttjv Traaa>v ] This recals the 
 example by which the last 
 hypothesis concerning know- 
 
 ledge in the Thea±tetns is il- 
 lustrated (p. 207 d): to exav n 
 o~t]pelov elnelv a> tcov uttuvtcov 
 
 8ia(fiepei to epcoTapevov — oinv 
 
 rjAiov irepi iKavov oipai o~oi etvat 
 awohe^acrQai on to \apnpoTaT6v 
 eo~Ti tuv Kara tov ovpavuv Iovtcov 
 
 ■nep\ yrjv. Since that definition 
 was given, the argument of the 
 "Sophist" has intervened. We 
 now see that it is not enough 
 to describe the sun as diffident 
 in brightness from other hea- 
 venly bodies. These other 
 bodies, which are not the sun, 
 have a nature of their own, 
 which is defined by and de- 
 fines their difference from the 
 sun. I do not know the sun, 
 or any other thing, therefore, 
 until I have determined the 
 exact limit between each of 
 these other natures and the 
 one in question. Comp. Legg. 
 6, 768 d : to 8e oXoi> Ka\ d*pt/3es 
 nepl evos re kol iravTav tcov Kara 
 ttoXiv Kai 7roXiTiKTjv ovk etrri yi- 
 yveo~6ai aacpes k. t. X. Parm. 
 136 b, C : nep\ otov av del imodfj 
 cos bvros Ka) ovk 'ovtos Kai otlovv 
 n'XXo nddos Tido-)(OVTOS, 8el (tko- 
 •ne\v tu {-vpftaivovTa 7rpos civto 
 Kai npos ev eKaaTov t5>v aXXcov, 
 o ti av TtpofKji K.r.X. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 93 
 
 zSi. iraacov TiOcopev ; rj XeyoLjxev /lev av tl dXrjOe's, ov 
 "• fxrjv aa(j)is ye ovBe TeXeov, irpiv av kol t auras avrr/? 
 waaas TrepieXodfiev ; 
 
 NE. 20. 'Opdm. 
 
 HE. Ovkovv /xera. Tavra Troiryreov o Xeyo/xev, "iv 
 ecpefjij? rj/jLii> 6 Xoyo? trj ; 
 
 NE. SO. nwy 5' ov; 
 
 HE. Tlpcorov p.ev to'lvvv Bvo Te^yas ovaas 7repi 
 iravTa to. Bpwpteva Oeaacofieda. 
 
 NE. SO. TLvas ; 
 
 HE. Tt)j> /xeV r?;? ye^ecreco? ovaav ^vvatTLOv, rrjv 
 B> avrrjv air lav. 
 
 NE. 20. nw ; 
 
 HE. ' Oaai pev to irpayp.a avrb ptrj BrjpiovpyovaL, 
 e rah Be BrjiuovpyovaaLs opyava 7rapao-Kevd{pvcriv, 
 cov pLrj irapayevopievwv ovk av wore epyaaOelrj to 
 7rpoaT€Tayi±evov eKaaTj] twv Teyycov, ravTa? fxev 
 i^vvaiTLOvs, tcls Be avTO to wpaypta direpyafypLevas 
 aiTias. 
 
 NE. 20. "Ex« yovv Xbyov. 
 
 HE. Mera tovto Brj Ta? p.ev irepl re arpaKTOvs 
 Ka\ KepKtBas K.a\ birbaa aXXa opyava ttjs irepl tol 
 a/KpieapLara yevearem KOivcovel, Tracras ^vvairlov? 
 
 plete until 
 all these 
 have been 
 parted off. 
 "We must 
 not be con- 
 tented with 
 saying that 
 
 5 it is the 
 noblest of 
 the indus- 
 tries which 
 have to do 
 with wool- 
 len cloth. 
 First, then, 
 we may 
 draw a uui- 
 versal dis- 
 tinction 
 between 
 productive 
 and admi- 
 nicular 
 arts ; and 
 then apply 
 this distinc- 
 
 j j. tion to the 
 case in 
 point. 
 Washing, 
 mending, 
 and other 
 furbishing 
 of clothes, 
 carding, 
 spinning, 
 
 •20 and the 
 other em- 
 ployments 
 operosce 
 Minerva 
 included 
 underwool- 
 
 2. 7rph av] So all the 
 MSS. except 2Y. aS is suffi- 
 cientty in point : and for the 
 omission of au (more common 
 in tragedy), cf. Tim. 57 b : 
 irp\v — iK(pvyfjs, where there is 
 no good reason to suspect the 
 text. 
 
 8. 8vo — Texyas] The dis- 
 tinction between cause and 
 condition, which is the essen- 
 
 tial point in this part of the 
 argument, is also stated in 
 Phfedo 99 a, b ; Phileb. 27 a; 
 Tim. 46 c, d. 
 
 2 2. rrjs nepl ra apcpucrpaTa 
 yeueaecos] Cf. Soph. 25 1 c: 
 rrjs nepl (ppovrjaiv KTrjaecos. " All 
 
 the instruments that share in 
 the operations for producing 
 clothes." 
 
94 
 
 IIAAT0NQ2 
 
 working, 
 are pro- 
 arts, 
 
 €L7ro)/ji€i>, rets Se avra OepoLTrtvovaas kul Sijpiovpyou- p. »j 
 era? ahta? ; 
 
 NE. 20. 'OpOoTara. 
 
 HE. T&>i> cuTicov drj ir\vvTLKr)v p,lv koll aK€(TTiKr)i> p. 282] 
 5 /cat iraaau ti)v irepl ravra 6epairevTiKr)v, iroXki]^ 
 ovarj9 Trj? KoaprjTiKrj? rovvravOa avrf/s popiov, et/cos* 
 pdXiara irepikapfidvtiv ovopdfyi'Tas irav rfj re^vy 
 rfi KvacpevTiK?). 
 
 NE. 20. KaAwy. 
 [o ££E. Kai )U?)i> * fjavriKrj* ye koll * vrjcrTiKr)* Kal 
 iravra av ra 7repi ttjv ironqaiv avrr/v rrjs i(j6r)T0<s r\<i 
 Xeyopev pepr], p. la rls Icttl riyviq tgjv vtto ttolvtcdv 
 Xeyopcevtov, rj TaXaaiovpyiKT). 
 
 I. avra] Sc. ra apepuapara. 
 
 4. Twv alriav — nXwriKrjv] 
 
 The partitive genitive, as in 
 ttjs yvaa-TiKrjs oaov eTriraKTiKov, 
 SUpr. 263 e; ra ire^a ra>v rjpepcov, 
 supr. 265 b. 
 
 5. TroWr/s — jx6piov~\ Appo- 
 sition. The genitive is not 
 absolute, but is resumed in 
 avTTjs because of the interven- 
 tion of the participle. See 
 Theagt. J55 e, and note. 
 
 7. irepihaixfiaveiv — KvcKpevTixfi] 
 
 The dative is governed by 
 
 7repiXapj3dvet.v, which 6vopd£ovras 
 explains. Cf. Soph. 225 a : 
 ra> — a-wpart 7rpos crcopara yLy- 
 vopeva — ovopa Xeyeiv ri toiov- 
 tov riBepevovs olov (Hmutikov. 
 
 Phsedr. 273 e ; Theset. 148 e ; 
 Soph. 226 e. The accusative 
 ttuv depends on the participle 
 and the infinitive taken toge- 
 ther. 
 
 nap] Agreeing with popiov, 
 and of course including nXwri- 
 
 Krjv, aKea-TiKrjV k.t.X. 
 
 10.* gaVTLKl)* *VT](TTIK>]*~\ MSS. 
 
 ^avTKrjv — vrjariKrjv. The correc- 
 tion is due to Stephanus. 
 
 II. rjs Xeyopev] Sc. rr/s {peas. 
 
 I 2. pla tls eari re^i"]] " Form 
 
 a single art which is one of 
 those universally acknow- 
 ledged, that of working in 
 wool." Cf. Legg. 7, 805 e: 
 
 KepKt'Scoi/ ap%eiv koX ivao-qs raXa- 
 aias. iari follows the num- 
 ber of the nearest word, and 
 is also assisted by the neuter 
 plural peprj. Cf. infr. b, irav 
 tovto, and 284 e, 288 d: Xpv- 
 
 o~6v re Kal apyvpov Ka\ rrdvB' 
 
 oirocra peraXXeverai K.r.X. Kal 
 
 en cpXoi(TTi.Krj — Kal o<rai — elal 
 re^vaf ev 8e avrb Trpocrayopevopev 
 ttuv. Where avrb, referring to 
 all the preceding nominatives, 
 is made singular by ev. 
 
 rwv — Xeyopevcov ] " Used 
 
 in common parlance," so that 
 it is needless to invent a 
 technical name. Cf. Soph. 
 220 d : vn avrcov Ta>v nepl TTjV 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 95 
 
 282. NE. 20. Ilwy ydp ov ; 
 
 h S*E. T?)y 87) TaXaaiovpyiKrjS 8vo Tp^pard icrrov, 
 kcu tqvtoiv tKarepov apa 8volv TrecfjvKarou riyvatv 
 fiiprj. 
 
 NE. 20. n«? ; 
 
 S*E. To /X€f ^OLVTIKOV KCU TO Tl}9 K€pKL<TTlKr)? 
 
 ijpiav kol oaa ra ^vyKeipeva car dXXrjXcou d(f)L(TTr)(Ti, 
 irav tovto toy €i> (ppd^etu Trjs re raXaaiovpyla^ avrrjs 
 €(ttl 7T0V, kou peydXa rive Kara, irdvra i]plv rjar-qv 
 T€)(ya, tj avyKpiTiKT] re kou dtaKpiTiKr] — 
 NE. 20. Na/. 
 
 Now of 
 wool work- 
 ing there 
 are two 
 chief kinds, 
 each falling 
 
 5 under one 
 of the two 
 great cate- 
 gories of 
 division 
 and compo- 
 sition. 
 Carding 
 and one 
 use of the 
 
 10 comb be- 
 long to 
 wool-work- 
 
 Gr\pav 7TVpevTiKi)v prjdijvai crvp.- 
 
 fJefirjitev. The Stranger loves to 
 parade the commonness of his 
 examples. For the genitive, 
 
 cf. Rep. IO, 615 d : ideaaop-eda 
 — Kal tovto tS)v 8eiva>v 6ea.pa.T00v. 
 
 An art acknowledged by all 
 men is distinguished from one 
 for which a name has to be 
 invented, such as 8o^op,iprjTiKr) 
 in the Sophist. 
 
 3. toutoiv eKarepov — Tre(pvi<a- 
 
 tov] The dual verb is used 
 
 because tovtoiv eKUTepov = tovtco 
 eKciTepov, which is rather sug- 
 gested by the plural /xeprj. 
 <Jf. infr. 284 e : 8ui(pepov aXXr)- 
 \olv. " And these are parts, 
 each of them of two arts at 
 once :" viz. the one of Ta\a- 
 o~iovpyiKr] and o-vyKptTLKT}, the 
 other of ToXao-. and 8iaKpiT. 
 
 6. to Trjs KepKicrTiKrjs rjpiav] 
 
 The use of the Kepxh or 
 " comb" was partly to drive 
 the threads of the woof close 
 together, but partly also (as 
 appears from Cratyl. 388 a) 
 to keep the threads of the 
 warp and woof (here especially 
 the warp, infr. ottjuoo-i) dis- 
 
 tinct. This latter "half" of 
 the use of the comb belongs 
 to SiaKptTiKi), " divisive art." 
 
 9. fieydXa Tive — 8iaKpLTiKr) ] 
 
 The course of the sentence is 
 interrupted by the introduc- 
 tion of this clause. The words 
 should have run, Trjs re raXa- 
 o-iovpyias avTrjs ecrTi ttov Kal Trjs 
 
 8iaKpiTiKr)s. But the last word 
 required explanation, which is 
 conversationally interposed. 
 
 Cf. Horn. Od. I. 424, 5: 
 alib. Soph. (Ed. Col. 471- 
 473 : O. oTav 8e tovto x 6 ^' 
 iiKr)paT0v \dj3a> ; X. KpaTijpes 
 elo-iv, av8pos ev^eipos Tiyyr], hv 
 KpaT epe^ov kcu Xafias up.cpio'To- 
 
 p-ovs. Ejusd. Track 750-755 : 
 
 od' elpne — uktt) tis — eaTiv, ev8a 
 
 j3a>p.ovs opl^et. — ov viv — 
 
 eo-el8ov. 
 
 9. rjo-Trjv] " There are two 
 comprehensive arts of univer- 
 sal application, with which we 
 are familiar." Cf. Soph. 228 
 
 e : eyeveadrjv. lb. 258 C : r)v Te 
 
 ical earn. Compare the frequent 
 use of the perfect : e. g. vev6p.tKa 
 Soph. 227 a, 228 a, 265 d, 
 infr. 293 b. 
 
96 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 tag and 
 <li\ ision. 
 
 l'.ui our 
 concern is 
 w iih that 
 part of 
 wool-work- 
 tag which 
 is a part of 
 composi- 
 tion : of 
 which one 
 kind twists 
 and the 
 other inter- 
 laces. 
 
 SE. Tt}? TOLVVV §ia.KpiTLK.l]S T\ T€ ^U.VTLKl] KOLL TOL 
 
 vvv <5?) pyOeura airavTa Icftlv' ?} yap eV ipioi? re koll 
 arypLoaL SiaKpLTiKt], «epKi8i p.ev aXXov rpoirov yiy- 
 vofievr], x € P aL ^ erepov 9 f-oyev dcra dpruos ouofiara 
 sipprjOrj. 
 
 NE. 20. Haw i±ev ovv. 
 
 £*E. KvBis 8rj ivaKiv ervyKpiTLKrjs fiopiov ap.a KOLL 
 
 raXaaLOvpylas iv aury yLyvoptevov AdficopLew oaa 8e 
 
 rrjs Slolkpltlkt}? t)v olvtoOl, */x€#fc3/i€Z/* £vp.TravTa, 8l)(a 
 
 loripLvovres ryv rakaaLovpylav hiaKpiriKto re koll crvy- 
 
 KpLTLKW T/jLTJ/jLOLTI. 
 
 NE. 2Q. ALypyaOco. 
 
 aE. To avyKpLTLKOP to'lvvv av aoi koll tolAolctl- 
 
 p. 282 L 
 
 2. iv ipiois re Kal ott^oo-i] 
 gavTLKf} being employed with 
 the former, to ttJj Kepiao-TiKrjs 
 rnxicrv with the latter. 
 
 3. tcepxidt] Viz. in the case 
 of the warp. 
 
 4. x e P (Ti l I n that of the 
 raw wool. 
 
 ecrx ev — ovofiara] Cf. Soph. 
 
 227 a, ovopara eaxev, and note. 
 
 Tim. 39 d : oaa 5V ovpavov 
 Tvopevop-zva eo-^e Tponds. 
 
 8. iv avTj} yiyvop.evov\ " Find- 
 ing place therein :" viz. iv rfj 
 TaKauLovpyiq, which is the ge- 
 neral subject. " To be referred 
 thither as contained therein :" 
 as when a segment of one 
 circle is contained in another 
 circle. Stallbaum punctuates 
 before avroBi, which he trans- 
 lates hie statim, an emphatic 
 sense, which in Attic Greek 
 is generally reserved for avrov. 
 " Let us now turn and take a 
 part of the process of wool- 
 working, which is at the same 
 time a part of composition ; 
 
 and let us dismiss ((ie6ia>nev) 
 all the parts of division which 
 we found there (rjv avrodi, sc. 
 iv avrfj), separating the art 
 into two halves, distinguished 
 by composition and division." 
 MSS. pericopev. No attempt 
 is made to " follow up " (p.e- 
 rUvat) the divisions of Siaicpi- 
 tlkt]. Probably therefore for 
 fieriafiev we should read p.e6i- 
 S>p.ev or fieda>p.ev, as Hermann 
 has already seen. The present 
 tense agrees better with rifivov- 
 res, which is in immediate 
 construction with it. The 
 pres. subj. occurs Phileb. 62 
 d : p,edi£>. It is surprising 
 that Dr. Badham should prefer 
 p.€Trjpev to this. Cf. Soph. 267 
 b : to S' a\\o TTav d(pwp,ev p,a- 
 XaKicrdevTes — p.ede[ada>. 
 
 13.T6 avyKpiriKov Siaiperiov] 
 
 " You must again, Socrates, 
 divide the part which belongs 
 at once to combination and to 
 wool-working." 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 97 
 
 t83. ovpyiKov ajxa popiov, co ScoK/jares", SiaipeTe'ov, etirep 
 " 'lko.vcos pteXXopev rrjv irpoppydelaav vtyavTiKrjv al- 
 p-qaeiv. 
 
 NE. 20. Ovkovv xpr). 
 
 3^E. Xpr) /xeV ovi>' kcu Xeywpev ye avTrjs to pev 
 elvai arpeTTTiKov, to 8e o-vpirXeKTiKOV. 
 
 NE. 20. 'A/)' ovv pavdavco ; SoKei? yap pot to 
 7repl tttjv tov o~Tr)p.ovos epyaalav Xeyeiv o-TpeirTiKov. 
 
 HE. Ov jjlovov ye, dXXa kcu KpoKrjs. y yeveaiv 
 ao~Tpo(f)ou Tiva avTrjs evprjaopev ; 
 
 NE. 20. OvBafim. 
 
 aE. Atopiaai 8r} kcu tovtolv eKctTepoW '/crco? yap 
 e o 8iopio-pLo? eyKatpo? av ctol yevouro. 
 
 NE. 20. Ufj; 
 
 HE. Tfjde. twv 7rep\ ^avTiKrjV epycov pr\Kwdev re 
 Kai cryov ttXcctos' Xeyopev elvai KccTaypcd tl ; 
 
 NE. 20. No/. 
 
 HE. Touroi; Srj to pev wrpaKTCp re crTpa(pei> kcu 
 o-Tepeov vrjpa yevopevov OTr}p.ova pXv <pd0L to vrjpa, 
 
 The warp, 
 and also 
 
 io the woof, 
 are made 
 by twist- 
 ing. Hence 
 spinning 
 is distin- 
 guished 
 into two 
 branches : 
 the one 
 
 *5 producing 
 a compact 
 and hard, 
 the other 
 a looser 
 and softer, 
 yarn — each 
 being pro- 
 portioned 
 
 8. tov o-ttjuovos] The woof 
 has not yet been mentioned. 
 
 Cf. SUpr. : iv arrj/jLOCTi. 
 
 9. dXka kcu KpoKrjs ] The 
 
 woof was more loosely spun : 
 hence, as well as for the rea- 
 son just given, (that no men- 
 tion had been made of the 
 woof,) Young Socrates' over- 
 sight is more excusable. 
 
 yeveo~LV — evprjcropev ;] " Shall 
 we find any mode of producing 
 it without twisting?" 
 
 15. rwv irepX £avTiKr]V epyoov] 
 
 Tt, is to be supplied from below. 
 It often happens in these dia- 
 logues that a word is contrived 
 to "pay a double debt." Cf. infr. 
 226 b: tov cro(pLo-Tov nepi K.r.A. 
 
 1 6. crxov 7r\aTOs] Cf. SUpr. C, 
 note on eVx«/. 
 
 KaTaypa] The word is used 
 by Sophocles, Trach. 695, and 
 the corresponding verb Kardyeiv 
 occm-s in Soph. 226 c : £aiveiv, 
 Ka.Ta.yeiv, KepKi^eiv. 
 
 18. arpaKT(»] It would ap- 
 pear from this that the woof 
 was spun by the baud without 
 the use of the spindle. 
 
 19. o-Tepeov vrjpa] Probably 
 hinting at a derivation for 
 
 o-TT]p,-cov, quasi (TTeppovrjp.-. 
 
 <TTT)p.OVa 0-T7\p.0V0V7)TlKr\V~\ Tlie 
 
 sentence becomes irregular from 
 expansion. The Bodl. has o-rn- 
 povovqTiKT)V with AEIIEY. 
 
98 
 
 HAATQNOS 
 
 to tlie other 
 w iih a view 
 to the final 
 
 result. 
 
 These dis- 10 
 tinctions 
 bring the 
 art of wool 
 
 ti)v Se airtvOvvovaav aura reyyrjv dvat urr]ixovo\n]- 
 
 TlKl'-jV. 
 
 NE. 20. 'OpOm. 
 
 SE. 'Oaa Se ye av rrjv \xlv crvo~Tpo(l)rjV yavvrjv 
 
 5 Xafifiavei, rfj Se rod aTiyiovos ifiTrXe^ei wpo? rr\v rrj? 
 
 yvd^ecos oXktjv ep/ieTpco? rrjv pLaXaKOTrjra 'Lately 
 
 tolvt apa KpOKrjv pcev ra vr}6evTa, tyjv Se einTeTay\xe- 
 
 vy)v avTois elvai reyi>r)v ™Tivofr KpoKOvrjTiKrjV (f)a>[Aev. 
 
 NE. 20. 'Opdorara. 
 
 SE. Kcu f±r)V to ye ttjs vtyavTiKrjs fiepo? o Trpov- 
 OefxeOa, hovt'i irov hr\\ov rj^ij. to yap crvyKpiTiKr}? 
 
 p. 28 
 
 I. aira] Sc. ra tcivtijs Ttjs 
 (TV<7Tpo(f)rjs (viz. rrjs vr)<Teas) epya. 
 
 Vague neut. pi. : cf. Theret. 
 207 e. 
 
 4. x a ^ vr l v '\ Used literally 
 — " open" (from x aLVW )- CJf. 
 Aristoph. Av. 819 ; Passow, 
 Lex. s. v. 
 
 5. rfj Se rod — iV^et] " But 
 
 have a softness proportioned 
 to the intertexture of the 
 woof, with a view to the de- 
 gree of force to be used in 
 dressing the cloth." So the 
 gentle and brave natures are 
 combined with a view to their 
 profiting by the rubs which 
 give the finishing touches to 
 a state. Cf. infr. 310. The 
 reading of 3, rov Kvacpews, de- 
 serves consideration. 
 
 8. * nva * ] MSS., rr/u : S 
 om. Cf. Theset. 172c: ubi vulg. 
 ttiv. four MSS., nva. Soph. 
 2l8 C : Tex vr l TCS KrrjTiKTj. lb. 
 220 e : rpiohovrla ris. KpoKo- 
 vtjtikt] is arrag Xeyopevov, hence 
 
 the article is out of place. 
 
 IO. p.epos 6 rrp.] Sc. to rrjs 
 ipeas eo-flrJTos v(pavriKOV. 
 
 IT. ro yap — i(paPTLKTjv] "For 
 
 when one part of the composi- 
 tion contained in wool-working 
 creates a fabric by the direct 
 intertexture of warp and woof, 
 we call the whole result wool- 
 len cloth, and the art which 
 presides over this we call 
 weaving." Lit. " That portion 
 of the combining branch of 
 wool-working (which finds 
 place) when" &c. Cf. supr. 
 282 c. Or, perhaps, "When 
 the branch of the art of com- 
 bination which is contained in 
 wool -working creates" &c. In 
 the latter case the genitive is 
 either (1) gen. of apposition, 
 like Tivos yevovs in Soph. 257 e: 
 or (2) t^s is genitive by attrac- 
 tion to (TvyKpiTiKrjs for to, " the 
 part of composition included 
 in wool-working :" or (3) there 
 may be a transition from the 
 former to the latter meaning : 
 i. e. cvyKpiTLKrjs is at first par- 
 titive, but as resumed with ttjs, 
 is the genitive of apposition. 
 But the meaning given above 
 is the most natural, and is not 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 99 
 
 183. rrjs iv TaXacrLovpyta. fiopiov otolv evOvirXoKta KpoKrj? 
 koll CTTrjfiovos airepydijirai 7rXey/ia, to fxev TrXe^Oev 
 Qpnrav laOijra epedv, ttjv Se eVi tovtco Teyvijv ouaav 
 TTpoaayopevo/xev v(pavTiKr)v. 
 
 NE. 20. 'OpOoTara. 5 
 
 SE. YAtV' TL 8tj 7T0T€ OVV OUK €V0V? UTTeKpLvdfltda 
 b 7r\€KTLK1]V dvfXl KpOKT)9 KOLL CTTrjflOVOS ixpavTLKrjv, 
 
 dXXd 7repLr]X6op.ev iv kvkXco irdpuroXXa 8lopl(jo/jl€vol 
 p.drrjv ; 
 
 NE. 20. Ovkovv epLOLye, co ijeve, [xdnqv ovhlv tcov 10 
 piqOevTcov e'Sotje p-qOrjvaL. 
 
 i£JE. Kat 6avp.a<TT0v ye ovdev dXXd rd)( av, 
 
 CD p.CLKdpL€, 86^€L€. TTpOS 8r) TO VOCTrj/JLa TO TOLOVTOV, 
 
 av apa iroXXaKLs vaTepov eTrly — 6avp.aaTov yap 
 ou8ev — , Xoyov olkovoSv tlvol irpocrrjKOVTa irep\ irdv- 15 
 
 C TCOV TOW TOLOVTCOV prjOrjVOLL. 
 
 NE. 20. Ae'ye p.6vov. 
 
 3?E. YlpCOTOU TOLVVV i8cO/JL€V TTOLCraV TTjV T€ V7T6p- 
 
 fioXrjv koll T7)v eXXeLxj/Lv, tva kcltol Xoyov iiraLvtopLev 
 koll yj/eycofiev tol /xaKpoTepa tov 8£ovtos eKacrTOTe 20 
 Xeyop.eva koll TavavTLa irepl tol? T0Laa8e Blol- 
 Tpifids. 
 
 weaving 
 intu clearer 
 light : a:s 
 that part 
 of the com- 
 position 
 included 
 in wool- 
 working in 
 which a 
 web- is made 
 by the di- 
 rect inter- 
 texture of 
 woof and 
 warp. 
 But why 
 could we 
 not say at 
 once that 
 weaving 
 was the 
 intertex- 
 ture of 
 warp and 
 woof? 
 Lest some 
 one should 
 think our 
 labour vain, 
 let us exa- 
 mine the 
 whole ques- 
 tion of 
 length and 
 brevity. 
 
 the less probable for being 
 somewhat involved. 17 iv raka- 
 (Tiovpyla a-vyKpiTiKT] must in this 
 case be supplied as the subject 
 
 of aTTtpya^rjTUl. 
 
 6. tl dr] 7rore] This raises 
 the whole question of the uti- 
 lity of the present method, for 
 which see General Introduc- 
 tion. Cf. also Gorg. 453, 454. 
 
 13. to v6<rr)[xa to t.] Sc. to 
 Sd^at aTTa pa.TT]v prjdrjvat. 
 
 14. 7J-oAXajay] " Haply, as it 
 very likely may." Cf. Phaadr. 
 
 238 C : iav apa tvoXKukis vvpepo- 
 Xtjtttos 7rpo'i6pTOS tov Xoyov yevm- 
 pai, prj 6avpao-r]s. 
 
 2 1 . TavavTia^ I. e. j3paxvTepa 
 tov deovros. 
 
 irep\ Tas Toidafte 6\arpi/3ds ] 
 
 These words depend on inai- 
 
 vapev kcli yp'tycopfu as well as On 
 
 Xeyopepa. " That with refer- 
 ence to such interviews as this 
 we may apportion praise and 
 blame reasonably to the argu- 
 ments used in them." Cf. 
 Phaedr. 234 e : Ti oV; ko.1 
 
 O 2 
 
100 
 
 HAATON02 
 
 NE. 20. Ovkovv xpv- V- 2 ^; 
 
 H*E. Oe/Oi <5?) roi;rG)i> avTwv o Aoyos yfjuv, oi/jloli, 
 yiyvopevos opOoos av yiyvotTo. 
 
 NE. 20. TtW ; 
 5 SE. M^/couy re Trept /ecu (3paxvT7]TO? kcu 7rdar)9 
 v7r€po)(r)? re Ken tAAelxf/eois. rj yap irov perprjTLKT] d 
 7repl ttolvt iarl ravra. 
 
 NE. 20. Nat. 
 
 SE. AceAoopev tolvvv avri]v Svo pepr/' 8e7 yap 8r) 
 
 io7Tp09 O VVV CnT€V(!)OfJL€l>. 
 
 NE 20. Aeyois av rrjv diaipecriv 07rr). 
 
 SE. Tjjde' to fiev Kara r-qv irpos aAArjAa p.tye- 
 
 Tavrrj Set hit epov re /cai aov t6v 
 \6yov inaivt6r]vai, cos to. heovra 
 
 €ipr]KOT0i TOV TT01TJT0V, dXX' OVK 
 
 ineivrj fxovov, ort o~a(pr) /cat arpoy- 
 yv\a /c.r.A. 
 
 5- Mtjkovs re 7rept — e'XXet\^ecos] 
 
 For an application of the fol- 
 lowing idea, cf. Legg. 4, 719 d : 
 
 ovaiqi yap rcKprjs Tr]s nev VTTepjSe- 
 (3\r]ix€vr)s ttjs oe eWenrovarjs Tr)s 
 Se p-erpLas. lb. 722 a : ret yap 
 /3e'Xrtora, uAV ov ra (3paxvTciTa 
 oboe ra prjKrj TLprjreuv. Tim. 82 
 a : to tu>v voaa>i> odev ^vviaTarai, 
 
 8r)\6i> 7rov /cat iravTi yrjs 7rvpos 
 
 v8aT0S re /cat depos, tovtcov f] 
 irapa (pvaiv 7rAeove£ta /cat eVSeta. 
 Theaet. I 7 2 e : /cat 81a pa<pa>v rj 
 (3paxeoiv pe'Aet ouSev Xe'yeip, av 
 p.6vov ru^cocrt row 6W0?. 
 
 6. 77 y<ip 7tou] So the Bodl., 
 with T3 : cett. rj. 
 
 perpTiri/cr;] Cf. Phileb. Sllb 
 
 fin. The fii'st mention of pe- 
 TprjTtKr) is in the Protagoras, 
 where it has not been suffi- 
 ciently observed that the 'utili- 
 tarian' hypothesis is only used 
 as a means to bring Protagoras 
 
 to acknowledge that virtue is 
 science. Thus expediency is 
 the point of transition from 
 the arbitrary to the just, as in 
 Theret. 178 to axpiXipov is the 
 point of transition from the 
 apparent to the real good. 
 
 9. duo peprj] For the accus., 
 cf. Hdt. VI. IOO : eqbpoveov 81- 
 (paaias I8eas. 
 
 10. TTpOS Ci] I. C 7Tp0C- T0VT0 0. 
 
 Cf. Theaet. 1 7 7 e : tovto SV ttov 
 CTKccpp av ei'77 irpos o \eyopev. 
 
 1 1 . 07177] Sc. Siaipereov. Cf. 
 Soph. (Ed. Tyr. 926, Aj. 103, 
 874. 
 
 12. The words tt]v irpos a\- 
 Xrj\a peyedovs /cat crpt/cpoYfiros 
 
 Koivwvlav are not free from 
 doubt. For they may mean 
 either "the mutual communion 
 of greatness and littleness," 
 (where the article seems to be 
 required,) or " the participa- 
 tion (of things) in greatness 
 and littleness relatively to one 
 another." The latter is right ; 
 although the former meaning 
 may not unnaturally suggest 
 
riOAITIKOS. 
 
 101 
 
 183. QoVS KGU O-fllKpOT-qTOS KOIVCOVLOLV, TO $€ KCLTU TlfV TT]<i reference to 
 
 / » / » / the stand- 
 
 yeveatcos avayKaiav ovaiav. ardofwhat 
 
 NE. 20. Y\co$ Xeyei? ; \]„\ >iore 
 
 37E. 'Ap ov Kara (Pvcrii> SoKel croi to fxeitpv i£ Much. 
 
 fjLr)8evbs eTepov $eiv fxeitpv Xeyetu 77 tov cXolttov oy, 5 
 c koll tovXclttov av tov fieitpvos eXuTTOv, aXXov <5e 
 
 /jLi]8ei>6? ; 
 
 NE. 20. ,r Epoty€. 
 
 aE. TV fie ; ro Tr)i> rou fxeTplov (fyvcriv vnep- 
 
 itself to a reader of the So- 
 phist, where the Koivcovia chiefly 
 spoken of is the mutual com- 
 munion of ideas. Compai-e 
 with this whole passage Phajdo 
 100, 10 1. Note that to pel&v 
 = to peye'dovs kolvcovovv irpbs to 
 e'XaTTOv. And to eXaTTOV = to 
 
 aplKpOTTjTOS KOiVCOVOVV ITpOS TO 
 
 p.a.£ov. 
 
 1. to 8i — oho-iav\ These 
 words are meant to be enig- 
 matical, like the definition 
 of rhetoric as ttoXitikijs popLov 
 ei'ScoXoi/ in Gorg. 463 d, or as 
 
 ttjs tcov e7ra>8S)V Texvrjs popiov in 
 Euthyd.289e. (dvaTravXaydpTrjs 
 crnov8rjs yiyverai eviore f) Traibid, 
 Phileb. 30 e.) But they are 
 less clearly explained in what 
 follows. They seem to be 
 connected with the assertion 
 that a standard is necessary 
 to the existence of the pro- 
 ductions of art (infr. 284 a, 
 b), and may probably be ren- 
 dered " according to the other- 
 wise impossible existence of 
 production." avayKaiav is then 
 used in the same sense as in 
 
 Rep. 2, 369 e : e'lr] §' av rj dvay- 
 KaioTaTr] noXis in TeTTapav tj irevre 
 
 dv8pa>v. " A city could not 
 
 possibly consist of less than 
 four or five men." And ye'veo-is 
 is a general word for the ope- 
 rations of all the arts. Cf. 
 Soph. 235 e, Phileb. 27 a. 
 Compare Legg. 10, 903 d : 
 
 KaTu. bvvap.iv ttjv ttJs Koivrjs yeve- 
 
 o-fws. I. e. " So far as it was 
 possible that both should be 
 combined." Translate, therefore 
 — " I divide the art of measur- 
 ing in the following way. One 
 part is determined by the fact 
 that things partake of great- 
 ness and smallness relatively 
 to each other : the other by 
 this, that without it the exist- 
 ence of production would be 
 impossible." A similar verbal 
 use of the word oio-la occurs 
 immediately below (e, oio-las) 
 and in p. 285 b : yevovs twos 
 ovcriq. The meaning of this 
 passage will appear more 
 clearly on comparing Phileb. 
 25 d, 26 c. 
 
 9. Tt hi; — dya6o\ ;] " But, 
 again, shall we not say that 
 there is really found that 
 which exceeds or is exceeded 
 by the nature of the Meet, in 
 words, or, if so be, in deeds, 
 and that herein consists the 
 
102 
 
 IIAATQN02 
 
 fiaXXov koll virepfiaXXopevov vtt avrys Iv XoyoLS eire p. 28 
 koll eV tpyois dp ovk av Xe^opev coy ovtw yiyvo- 
 p.€i>oi>, Iv cp kcu Siacjje'povcTi paXLura i]p.cov ol re kukoi 
 kcu ol ciyaOol ; 
 5 NE. 20. <baivtTcu. 
 
 HE. Aittos apa Tcwrcvi overlap koll KplcreLs tov 
 peyaXov koll tov apLKpov Oereoi>, aAA' ov\ cb? tyap.c-v 
 apTL 7T/>09 aXXrjXa povov dew, aAA' cocnrep vvv elpr)- 
 tcu paXXov rr\v p\v irpos clXXtjXol Ae/creW, rrjv 8 av 
 loirpos to perpLOv. ov be eveKa, pLaOeiv dp av (3ov- 
 Xolp.eda ; 
 
 NE. 20. Tiiirjv; 
 
 chief mark of difference be- 
 tween bad men and good 1 " 
 Compare Rep. 1, 349, where 
 it is shewn that the good and 
 wise man does not aim at 
 " more" but at " what is 
 meet." 
 
 "When workmen strive to do 
 better than well 
 They do confound their skill in 
 covetousness." 
 
 (9.) tov fierpiov cpvo-iv] Com- 
 pare the darepov (piais of the 
 Sophist, the diSios cpvais of the 
 Philebus, and the igaicpvrjs cpv- 
 o~is of the Parmenides. The 
 word cpvo-is expresses the more 
 concrete or determinate con- 
 ception of the Idea. 
 
 6. AiTTas apa — 6ereov\ "We 
 
 must therefore assume that 
 great and small exist and are 
 discerned in these two ways, in- 
 stead of following what we just 
 now said, that one must only- 
 judge or speak of them (Sew 
 sc. Kpipeiv implied in Kplcreis, 
 or perhaps Xeyeiv from supr. 
 d) relatively to each other : 
 
 instead of this we must speak 
 rather in accordance with what 
 has just fallen from us, of one 
 mode of their existence which 
 is mutually relative, and of an- 
 other which is relative to an 
 ideal standard." The minute- 
 ness of the antithesis, d\\u — 
 obx — dX\a, and the explicit re- 
 sumption of the first clause 
 with the second d\\d, make the 
 sentence rather tortuous, but 
 the meaning is clear. In the 
 words aXXa — Setf the chief pre- 
 dicate is absorbed, as frequently 
 happens, in the relative clause. 
 Cf. Phileb. 54 d : oVep — einou 
 — Seiz/. 
 
 10. ov S' epeKa] Plato's dia- 
 lectical subtleties have gene- 
 rally an end beyond them- 
 selves. Here the end is the 
 vindication of the Arts, in 
 order to establish an Art of 
 Eule. Cf. Theset. 184 d : tov U 
 
 tol eveKa avrd croi BiaKpificofiai. 
 
 @ov\oip.fda.] The first per- 
 son is used, as more gentle 
 than the second. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 103 
 
 284. 3?E. Et irpos fiT/Sei* erepou tijv tov /JLeltjovos idcrei 
 
 Tl? (j)VaiV TJ 77-/90? TOVACLTTOIS, OVK €<TTai 7TOT6 TTpOS TO 
 
 jxtTpiov. rj yap ; 
 
 NE. 20. Ovrm. 
 
 SE. Qvkovv ras renvois re avras kcu rapya av- 
 twv ^vpLTravra ^SioXovfiev* tovtco tco Xoyco, kcu 5?) 
 kou T7)v (flTOV/Aevrjv vvv iro\iTiKi)V koll r-qv p-qOeicrav 
 v(pai>TiKr]v a(paviovfiev ; awacrai yap al roiavral irov 
 to tov pLCTplov TrXeov Kai eXaTTOv ovx coy ovk ov 
 dXK coy bv \aXeKov irepl Tas irpa^us irapa^vXaT- 
 b Tovari, Ka\ tovtod Srj tw Tpoirco to fitTpov crco^ovaai 
 irdvTa dyaOd Ka\ KaXd aTrepyd^ovTat. 
 
 NE. 20. T/ fxrjv ; 
 
 ££E. Ovkovv av TTju TroXiTiKTJv d<pavura)fi€V, airo- 
 
 1, eacr€t] "Will admit." Sc. 
 curat, to be supplied from eurai 
 infr., for which ellipse cf. 
 Theset. 195 d : dp(porepd ye kiv- 
 bvvevei 6 ~hoyos ovk edaeiv (sc. eivai 
 or alpe'io-dai). 
 
 g. rds re^va? re] re is an- 
 swered by Kai S17 Kai : avras Kal 
 rapya avrutv ^vpiravra is epexe- 
 getic of rexvas. 
 
 6. * 8io\ovpev * ] MSS. Ste- 
 Xov/zei/. The correction is due to 
 Bekker. 
 
 8. anao-ai yap ] Cf. Arist. 
 Eth. Nic. V. 4, 12 : eVrt 8e Ka\ 
 eVt rcov dXkav rex va)V rovro. av- 
 ■qpovvro yap av, el p.r] 6 ttoiccv koI 
 bcrov /cat oiov K.r.A. 
 
 IO. at ov ^aXe7ro^] " As being 
 baneful." Badham objects to 
 xaAe7roi> on the ground that 
 this adj. placed absolutely can 
 only mean " difficult to ob- 
 tain :" and conjectures x a ^ e7r ^s 
 
 napa<pv\drrovcri. But cf. 
 
 Symp. 176 d: on x a ^ f7rov ro ' f 
 
 dvBpamois 17 pedrj earl. lb. 204 : 
 avro yap rovro x a ^- e7rov dpadia. 
 Iufr. 308 a : Xa\endv etVej Kal 
 beivov Trddos. For 7rapa(p. cf. 
 
 Legg. 4, 715 a. 
 
 The distinction between the 
 two kinds of perprjrtKT] is not 
 present in Protagoras, p. 357. 
 
 cos ov ^aXe7roi' 7repi rds Trpd^eis 
 7rapa(pv\drrovcri] vrepl rds Trpa£. 
 has a double reference to ^aX. 
 and Trapacp., like nepl rds — 81a- 
 rpiftds supr. 283 c. Cf. Prot. 
 313 d: 6 rt — 7rovt]pdv TvepX rd 
 acopa. 
 
 12. Tidvra — dnepyd^ovrai ] 
 Compare the rhythm of Bep. 8, 
 
 546 C : rrdvra 7rpon-rjyopa Kal prjra 
 ivpbs a\\rf\a aTre^rjvav, and for 
 
 the expression, Legg. 4, 7 1 1 d, 
 
 6, 780 e : iravra dyaOd dnep- 
 
 yd£erai. lb. 783 e. Tim. 50 e. 
 
 14. dcpavlo-apev^ Cf. Soph. 
 249 c: os av emo-T-qp^v — dcpavl- 
 £ow la-xypi-irjrai irepi rivos 67177- 
 ovv. 
 
 5 Without 
 such a 
 standard 
 as is here 
 postulated, 
 the arts 
 and their 
 produc- 
 tions would 
 be destroy- 
 
 !0 ed, or ra- 
 ther made 
 impossible. 
 For it is by 
 keeping 
 just mea- 
 surement 
 that the 
 arts per- 
 form their 
 functions. 
 
104 
 
 HAATQNOS 
 
 po? rjfuv r) fxera tovto earai ^tyjctls tyjs fiaaiXiKrjs p. 
 
 NE. 212. Kai fxaXa. 
 
 aE. Ilorepof ovv, KaOarrep Iv tw aocfjiarr) 7rpocr- 
 srjvayKacrapev eivai to fir) ov, eireiftr) Kara tovto c 
 8ie(pvyev rj/xas' 6 Xoyo?, ovtco koll vvv to irXeov ad 
 kcu eXaTTOv fieTprjTa tt poaavayKacrTeov yiyveaOat fir) 
 77750? a'AA??Aa fiovov aXXa kcu irpos Tr)v tov fi€Tp(ov 
 yevecnv ; ov yap 8r) SvvaTov ye ovre ttoXltlkov ovt 
 loaXXov tlvol tcov Trepl to.? 7rpd£ei? eiriaT-qpLOva dva/i- 
 (j)Lal3r)TrjTC09 yeyovevai tovtov pr) ljvvop.o\oyr}0evTO9. 
 
 NE. 20. OvKOVV KOLL VVV O TL fiaXiaTa \pr) TOV- 
 TOV TTOlflV. 
 
 SE. TlXe'ov, co ~EcoKpaT€9, en tovto to epyov rj 
 i^Keivo' kcli Tot KciKeivov ye [iep.vrip.eda to fir)K09 oaov 
 r)v. aAA' v-KOTtQecydai plv to TOiovde irepi avTcov kol 
 paXa hiKaiov. 
 
 I 
 
 4. iv ra o-o($i<TTf)\ " In treat- 
 ing of the Sophist." A form 
 of reference like iv rfj Trapa^oXrj 
 twv fiicov, Phileb. 33 b: iv tov 
 o-KTjTTTpov rfj napaSoaei. Thuc. 
 I.IO. 
 
 5. eW§7? — Xoyos] " Because 
 at this point the question 
 eluded our grasp." 
 
 8. irpos — 77736?] There is a 
 slight variation in the mean- 
 ing of npos. " Not only in com- 
 parison with each other, but 
 with a view to the production 
 of that which is meet." To 
 perpiov is the result of the ap- 
 plication of p.irpov to produc- 
 tion. 
 
 9. yevecriv] Cf. Slipr. 283 d. 
 
 The frequent use of the word 
 yevems, iii the most general 
 is one of the character- 
 
 istic points of diction which 
 connect this dialogue with 
 Philebus, Timasus, and Laws. 
 
 ovr aXXov Tiva — yeyovevai] 
 Eight MSS. (including the 
 best) have tov, but t&v is pro- 
 bably right ; because the ad- 
 verb seems to require that 
 iirio-TT]p.ova should be taken 
 after yeyovevai. " Neither the 
 Statesman nor any other artist 
 of those concerned with action 
 can be proved an artist beyond 
 dispute." Cf. infr. 293 c : 
 
 d\r]6cos irn(TTT]p.ovas Ka\ ov 80- 
 Kovvras povov. 
 
 14. UXiov — 77 'who] There 
 is a further task indicated in 
 Legg. 4, 719 e : o-oi 8' oix ovtco 
 
 prjTeov, as vvv enres peTpiov elircov, 
 dWa t'l to peTpiov Kai onoaov 
 prjTeov. 
 
,84. NE. 20. To ttoIov ; 
 d aE. Oy 7Tore derjaei rod vvv XeyOevros 777)0? rr\v 
 
 nOAITIKOS. 
 
 105 
 
 2. 'i2? 7rore 8e>jcrei — earai 
 Trore] It has been thought that 
 this passage is seriously cor- 
 rupt : but when 6 ti (or 6) is 
 rendered as a pronoun, and 
 either nai introduced before 
 /j.el£uv, with six MSS., or re read 
 for ti (or ri ti, with Hermann), 
 the words as they stand give 
 a better meaning, and one 
 more suited to the context, 
 than any which it has been 
 proposed to substitute. " That 
 some day there will be need 
 of that which has now been 
 mentioned" (the proof that 
 "more" and "less" are relative 
 to a standard of right measure 
 as well as to each other, supr. 
 b) "for the demonstration of the 
 highest problem of all." (o.vto 
 TCLKpifiis is that absolute prin- 
 ciple which is essential to and 
 identical with perfection of 
 method. Cf. i Ale. 130 d: 
 avro to avro). " But (to dwell 
 only on) what is fairly and 
 sufficiently shewn for our pre- 
 sent purpose, this argument, 
 I think, comes grandly to our 
 aid, that we must alike believe 
 in the existence of the arts, 
 and at the same time (ap,a), 
 in a greater and less being 
 measured, not only in relation 
 to each other, but with a view 
 to the production of the mean. 
 For if the latter is true the 
 former is true (for eiceiva, cf. 
 Theset. 207 d, avra, and note), 
 and if the former exist, the 
 latter is the case ; and if either 
 is not, neither will ever be." 
 This explanation is substan- 
 tially the same as Stallbaum's. 
 
 It appears from the Philebus 
 that the absolute standard 
 (jueVpoi/) was closely allied in 
 Plato's mind with Reason and 
 the Idea of Good. The de- 
 monstration of the " very ex- 
 actness of truth" is probably 
 reserved for the " Philosophus." 
 Even in the dialectical dia- 
 logues Plato complains of an 
 imperfect method. For n 
 almost = o, = " a thing which," 
 cf. Gorg. 508 d: 6 fi« Sij ep.bs, 
 Bans TroXKaKis p.ev fj8r) e'lprjTai 
 ovSev 8e KmXvei /cat en \eye- 
 adai ov (jirjui K.r.X. The in- 
 definite relative is used be- 
 cause the antecedent is only 
 determined as the sentence 
 proceeds. " But as for that 
 which," &c. And for the 
 clause in apposition, cf. Theset. 
 158 b : 6 TroWdias. infr. 293 a. 
 A similar looseness of con- 
 struction occurs in Gorg. 454c: 
 dXX' tva \xt] 6avfjLa.crr]s — onep yap 
 \eya> k.t.X. For the notion of 
 a.KpL$eia, cf. Rep. 4,435 c-e, 504. 
 Comp. esp. with npos ra vvv, 
 435 d : tcov re irpoeiprjp,ev(i>v 
 d£iws. 5°4 D : T ® v — efnrpocrdev 
 eiYopevas dnodei^ets. For nep\ 
 
 avro TaKpifih, cf. Rep. 7, 525 a: 
 f] Tvep\ to ev p,d6r]o-ii. The Bod- 
 leian has SeiKWTai, with most 
 other MSS. 
 
 The distinction here brought 
 out obviously resembles and 
 may have suggested that drawn 
 by Aristotle in Eth. Nic. II. 
 between the absolute and re- 
 lative mean. But what is 
 absolute in Aristotle is rela- 
 tive in Plato. Aristotle's 
 nXeov, eXctTTOv, kclt avrb to 
 
 this in ;i 
 harder 
 piece of 
 work than 
 that. 
 
106 
 
 IIAATON02 
 
 We may 
 content 
 ourselves 
 
 for the pre- 
 sent willi 
 I lie indirect 
 proof, that 
 
 if inoiv and 
 
 Less are not 
 
 i lnis mea- 
 sured with 
 reference 
 to what is 
 meet and 
 proper, no 
 art can 
 ever exist. 
 Hence we 
 may pro- 
 ceed to di- 
 vide the 
 art of mea- 
 surement, 
 making 
 one seg- 
 ment to 
 consist of 
 
 7T€pi avrb TUKpifie? uirbtieL^iv. o tl de irpos ru vvv 
 kclAoos koll lkuvco? SeiKwrai, — Sokzl poL $or)6eiv /xe- 
 ya\<m peirws yplv ovto<s b Aoyo?, go? apa rjyrjTeov 
 bfioico? ra.9 re^va? Trdcras eivai [/tea] /JLe7(pv tl a/xa 
 5 kcu eXoLTTOv li€t peia 6 ] ou pa) 777)0? aAA?;Aa povov aAAa 
 KCLi Tvpo<i Ti]v tou peTplov yeveaiv. tovtov re yap 
 ovtos tKeiva ccttl KrxKelvcov ovcrcov eart /cat tovto, 
 fir] 8e ovtos TTorepou tovtcov ovSerepov avTcov ecrrai 
 
 7TOT6. 
 
 to NE. 20. Tovto p.ev opOoos' aAAa tl Sr) to p,€Ta 
 tovto ; 
 
 HE. Arjkou OTi Siaipo'ip.ev dv ttjv LieTpr]TLKr)v, 
 KaOairep epprjOr/, tclvtt) 8i\a TepLVovTes, ev p.ev tl~ 
 OevTts avTrjS pbpiov ^vpirdaas re^ay, birbaai rov 
 
 p. 2» 
 
 irpaypa are here viewed as 
 Trpo? aXXrjXa \i6vov. Aristotle's 
 •upas fjpas is Plato's 7rp6? ttjv 
 rov fierpiov yeveaiv, where the 
 appeal is to an absolute stand- 
 ard. This difference strikes 
 deeply into the character of 
 each philosophy. Vid. supr. 
 note on 259 b. It should be 
 noticed that Plato does not 
 speak of a mean in the former 
 case, but only of excess and 
 defect, and that Aristotle's 
 subjective mean is connected 
 with his distinction between 
 virtue and the arts, which 
 must be regarded as a forward 
 step in ethical inquiry. Com- 
 pare Legg. 5, 757 a (where we 
 seem to find the point of tran- 
 sition from the Platonic to the 
 Aristotelian pecroTTjs) : to'is yap 
 avlcrois tcl [era avicra yiyvoir av, 
 el pf] Tvyxjxvoi tov perpov. 
 
 2. (Sorjdelv peyaXoirpeTTws\ Cf. 
 Theset. 168 C : peyaXeioTepov av 
 
 toIs avrov e'l3orj6r](Tev. 
 
 4. opolcos — yeveaiv ] Cf. 
 Phajdo 76 e : els KaXov ye Kara- 
 4>eiyei o \6yos, els to opolms eivai 
 ttjv re ^v)(r}V rjpcov irp\v yevea6ai 
 rjpas kuI ttjv ovaiuv r\v S17 av vvv 
 Aeyets-. A direct proof of the 
 existence of such a standard is 
 still to seek. But it is enough 
 for our purpose that no art 
 can exist without it. 
 
 pel£6v ti apa Kal eXaTT0v\ 
 
 " There is a greater and less 
 whose measure is not merely 
 relative." I. e. This is one 
 kind of "greater" and " less." 
 But perhaps na\ should be re- 
 jected and re read for ti. Cf. 
 Theaet. 195 e : Xi6<o8es re. 
 MSS. ti. 
 
 8. iroTepov] " Either," " one 
 or other." 
 
 I 3. ev pev popiov — to 8' erepov] 
 
 According to the reasoning of 
 this passage, the former are 
 clearly subordinate to the latter. 
 
I10AITIK02. 
 
 107 
 
 284. apL0pov /cat fxrjK-q /cat fia&rj /cat irXaTq /cat TayvT-ryras 
 7rpo9 rovvavTLOv fierpovai, to <5e trepov, biroaai irpos 
 
 TO ptrpLOV KOLL TO TTpeiTOV KOLL TOV KOLLpOV KOLL TO SeOV 
 
 koll ttclvO' onoaa el? to fieaov uTrcpKLaOrj tcov kcrya- 
 
 TCQV. 
 
 NE. 20. Rat pLtya y eKOLTepov Tprjp,a eiVey, /cat 
 iroXv 8ia(f)epov aXXyXoLu. 
 
 SE. *0 yap 6vlot€, co 2co/c/)ares > , olopevoL 8rj tl 
 
 285. aotyov (ppcttJELv iroXXol tcov KopL\j/cou Xeyovaiv, coy 
 apa peTprjTLKT] Trepl ttolvt ecrrt tcl yiyvop,ei>a, tovt 
 clvto to vvv XtyOlv ov TvyyavtL. pLeTprjaecos pev yap 
 Sr) TLva Tpoirov ttolvO* birocra evTtyya pteTelXr/cpe' Slol 
 
 t. Taxvrr]Tas] The Bodleian, 
 with A EII 2, has iraxvTrjTas, cf. 
 infr. 299 e, where the intro- 
 duction of Traxe(TLV would be 
 more intelligible than of na- 
 XvrrjTas here, but the MS. au- 
 thority is slight. The tran- 
 sition from solid quantity to 
 speed is less obvious and more 
 Platonic and philosophical than 
 that from depth and breadth 
 to thickness : and density 
 (which Stallbaum speaks of) 
 can hardly be in question. See 
 the connexion between solid 
 geometry and astronomy (o>s 
 (popav ovcrav jiadovs) in Rep. 7, 
 
 528 foil. See esp. 529 d: t£>v 
 
 S' aKrjdLvuiv iroXii c'vdeiv, as to bv 
 rdxos kcu r) ovo~a (3pa8vTi)s iv tg> 
 d\rjdt,va> dpiBpca Ka\ ttclo-l to'is 
 akrjBivols cr^jj/iacri (popds re Trpos 
 a'XA^Xa (peperai Kcii tci ivovra 
 
 (pepei. Where the distinction 
 of the two kinds of astronomy 
 is essentially analogous to that 
 suggested here. Also Legg. 7, 
 820 sqq., 10, 896 d : prjKovs 
 o-a>pd~cov Ka) n\drovs kcu ftddovs 
 kci\ pcSfJLYjs. 
 
 4. dnaiKicrdr]] " Have removed 
 their abode" — as to a safe dis- 
 tance from evil. The word 
 seems to have been adopted 
 by the Pythagoreans. See 
 Mullach. Pyth. Fr. p. 537 : ov 
 
 pa<pdv ou8' dnaKicrpevcos. (Ec- 
 phantus ap. Stob.) 
 
 9. 7roXAoi Twv Kopy\ra>v\ Evi- 
 dently the Pythagoreans, who 
 are spoken of in similar terms 
 in Gorg. 493 c : Kop\j/os dvrjp, 
 icrcos 2iKe\6s tls rj 'ItoKckos. Crat. 
 405 d : 6Vt TavTa ndvTa, as 
 (paaiv 01 Kop^rol nep\ povcriKijv 
 kcu daTpovopiav, appovlq rivt tto- 
 Aei apa ttuvtu. 
 
 11. to vvv \ex6ev] That there 
 could be no yevecns without the 
 p(Tpiov, which is the first em- 
 bodiment of to peTpov, cf. 
 Phileb. sub. fin. and 55 e. 
 
 12. did 8e to pi] TrepiftdXrjTai] 
 
 " But from never having been 
 habituated to distinguish every 
 subject of inquiry according to 
 real forms, they not only jumble 
 indiscriminately, from a notion 
 that they resemble each other, 
 these widely different things. 
 
 which mea- 
 sure the 
 size and 
 
 lllllllltlT of 
 
 obj >■' 1 in 
 relation to 
 each other, 
 
 and one of 
 those which 
 measure 
 with refer- 
 ence to a 
 mean or 
 standard. 
 This is the 
 truth which 
 underlies 
 the doc- 
 trine that 
 "all is 
 measure- 
 ment." 
 
 r 2 
 
108 
 
 FIAATQN02 
 
 But, for 
 want of the 
 power of 
 distin- 
 guishing 
 kinds, the 
 authors of 
 this doc- 
 trine con- 
 fuse the 
 More and 
 the Too 
 Much, and 
 elsewhere 
 distinguish 
 inoppor- 
 tunely. 
 Whereas 
 one ought 
 not to rest 
 short of any 
 real dis- 
 tinction, or 
 
 oe to fir) kclt etSrj avveiOlaOai (TKOTreiv diaipovfievovs 
 ravra re toctovtov Siafa'povra ^vpfidAAovaiv evOv? 
 eh tolvtov ofioia vofiio-avres, kou rovvavTiov av tov- 
 tov Spaxitv, erepa ov Kara, fitpr) Siaipovvre?, Se'ov, 
 
 5 qtclv /lev Ti]v tcov iroWcov tl? irportpov aurOrjTai 
 Koivcovlav, /ir) 7rpoa(plaraa0aL irptv av Iv avrfj rd? 
 Stafpopas' 'idy Trdcras, OTToaamep iv eldeai Kelvrai, ret? 
 8e av iravToSairas dvo/iOLorrjTa?, orav iv 7rXr)0ecnv 
 o(f)0cocri, /irj Svvarov elvai dvcrcoTrovfievov iraveaOai, 
 
 io7rp\v av tjv/nravTa rd oiKela kvros fiias 6fioiOTr)T09 
 cptja? yevovs rivos ovcrla. 7rept(3d\rjTaL. ravra yueV 
 ovv wavco? irepi re tovtcov kcu 7rep\ tcov iXXelyj/ecov 
 
 p. 28 
 
 but fall into the converse error 
 of distinguishing other things 
 not according to their real di- 
 visions : whereas the right way 
 is, when one has first perceived 
 a common nature running 
 through a great variety of 
 things, not to desist till one 
 has seen all the differences 
 which subsist within that na- 
 ture, and which constitute dis- 
 tinct kinds, and on the other 
 hand, not to be able to look 
 contentedly upon the endless 
 diversity which has been seen 
 in a multitude of objects, until 
 one has brought all kindred 
 objects within the pale of a 
 single resemblance, and invest- 
 ed them with the real nature 
 of a single kind." 
 
 I . to [xr] Kar' e'lSrj] Cf. Rep. 
 
 5, 454 a, Phsedr. 265 e. 
 
 5. orav Tn tcov iroKkfov — 
 Koivcaviav] This " divinatio " 
 seems always to be assumed as 
 the first step in a dialectical 
 inquiry. Cf. Phileb. 16 d: piav 
 
 ibiav nepl nnvTOs €KaTTOTe 6epe- 
 povs Cyre'iV ivpr)<rav yap evovfrav. 
 
 7. oTroo-aurep] This is the 
 same thing which is expressed 
 in the Philebus (16 d, e) in the 
 words p.k\pm(p av to Kar ap^as 
 (V pi) 'oti ev koX TToWa xa\ ("nreipa 
 icrn povov 'idrj tls, aWa kox 6n6o~a. 
 
 iv e'lhecri KflvTaij Cf. Rep. 
 8, 544 d : rjris nal iv e'lBei 81a- 
 (fiavel tivl Ketrai. 
 
 8. ev irXfidea-tv] "Numbers," 
 or " multitudes," he cannot say 
 classes because they are not 
 yet classified. Cf. Theset. 157 c : 
 
 a> 8rj ddpolapaTi avdpanrov re tl- 
 devrat Ka\ \160v k.t.A., and the 
 
 oyKoi of the Parmenides, 164, 5. 
 This process corresponds to 
 that described in Phileb. 18 a-d. 
 
 9. hvo-o)TTovpevov\ " Looking 
 upon with discomfort or dis- 
 like." Cf. infr. 291 b, c. 
 
 1 1, yevovs tivos ovcriq] " With 
 
 the reality (dasein) of a genus." 
 ovo-la is used in nearly the 
 same sense as supra 284 bis. 
 
 = tco yevos ti elvat. 
 
 The latter half of this de- 
 scription (from Tas 8i av) is the 
 opposite of the second error 
 mentioned above. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 109 
 
 185. kou i>7T€p(3oXcov elprjadco' (f)vXaTTO)p,eu 8e povov on omit any 
 
 c 860 yevrj irepl olvtol e^evprjTai tyjs p€Tpr)TiKr}? kou ralization. 
 
 a (papev avr eivou pepLUcopeda. observation 
 
 , by tne way. 
 
 NE. 20. MepvrjcropeOa. Gramma- 
 
 Ahi. Mera tovtov or) tov Xoyov erepov irpoaoe- 5 tdonehave 
 
 j. / /i v , „ -v ' v \ / an end be- 
 
 ^copeua wept avrcov re rtov (r]Tovp.ei>a)V kou irtpi wot- yond them- 
 
 S(*l Vt'S 
 
 err;? 7-779 e^ TO?? roiolarSe Xoyoi? diarpifirj?. that of 
 
 NE. 20. To 7roio^ ; 
 
 making 
 gramma 
 rians. So 
 
 Hp t"' » / e « \ v / nans, oo 
 
 A£i. -ki rty avepotTO rjpas ttjv irept ypapp.ara the present 
 
 nquiry hai 
 m end be- 
 yond itf 
 that of 
 
 d Tore <pa*p.€V yiyveaOou rrjv Zjyriqo-iv kvbs evtKa paXXov JSter S 
 
 lecticians. 
 
 / ~ /1 ' « ' « inquiry has 
 
 avvovcnav tcov pavuavovTGiv, ottoto.v tis otlovv 10 an enc i ij e . 
 
 v »/i«/»n ' ' » « yond itself, 
 
 ovop.a epcoTrjarj tivwv ecrrt ypappaTcov, irorepov avrcp 
 
 tov 7rpoj3\i]0€VTO9 77 roD 7re/ot iravra tol 7rpo/3aXXo- 
 
 peva ypappaTLKcorepcp yiyveo~6ou ; 
 
 NE. 20. At}Ao^ ort roi> 7rep\ airavra. 15 
 
 HE. TV K av vvv r)puv 7} wepl tov woXitikov 
 
 <j]TY)cris ; eVe/ca olvtov tovtov irpofiefiXrjTai paX- 
 
 1. ^lAarra^ei-] Let us fix of a relative clause becomes 
 
 this in our minds. Cf. infr. absorbed in the antecedent. 
 
 297 a: fxexpmep av ev peya cpv- " If we were asked of the in- 
 
 Aarrwcm/ k.t.X. tercourse of learners with their 
 
 9. Ei tis — yiyve crdai;] "Were teachers about their letters, 
 one to ask us of the intercourse when one of them is asked of 
 of students in grammar (with what letters any noun is com- 
 their teacher), when one of posed, whether shall we say 
 them is asked to spell a word, that his study at such a time 
 whether shall we say that the is for the sake of the parti- 
 inquiry in which he then en- cular question, or for the sake 
 gages is for the sake of the of his becoming more expert 
 single problem thus set before in such subjects generally 1 ?" 
 him, or for the sake of be- Compare the structure of Soph, 
 coming more expert in all 237 b : el o-Trovog 8e°i k.t.A. 
 orthographical problems?" 1 o. avvova-iav is used in some- 
 
 The question which is the thing of a technical sense, 
 
 object of dvepoiro is to be 16. T* 8' av] For the punc- 
 
 sought in irorepov (pwpev k.t.X., tuation, cf. Phaedr. 234 d : ri 
 
 diich is the apodosis of the <roi (paiverai — 6 \6yos ; ov\ vntp- 
 
 sentence : just as when part <pvi><> — tlpi-jo-Bai 
 
] 10 
 
 riAATUNOS 
 
 still less is 
 such an art 
 as weaving 
 to be fol- 
 lowed fru- 
 its own 
 sake. But 
 (though 
 few are 
 aw T are of 
 this) the 
 highest 
 things have 
 no sensible 
 mean 
 through 
 which they 
 can be ex- 
 plained, but 
 are shadow- 
 ed forth by 
 
 Xov ?) tov 7T€p\ irdvra 8iaX€KTiK(oT(pois ylyve- p- 2b 
 aOai ; 
 
 NE. 20. Kai T0VT0 SvjXoV OTl tov Trtpi iroLvra. 
 
 aE. 'H ttov tov rr/s v<j)ai>TiKr}<z ye Xoyov avTrjs 
 r,ravTJ]s eveKa Oijpeveiv ovSei? av e'OeArjcreie vovv eyxuv. 
 aXX\ oifjLUL, tov? TrXeiaTovs XeXrfiev otl toI$ fiev tcov 
 ovtcov padlco? KarapLaOelv *aio-Or)Tal* rive? 6/J.oioTrjTe? e 
 7re(f)VKacriv, a? ov8ev yaXeirbv SrjXovv, otclv clvtcov tl? 
 (3ovXr}0r] tco Xoyov ciitovvti irepi tov parj /xera irpa- 
 io y/jLarcou aXXct x M P^ Xoyov pafiico? ivdeitjacrOai' toi? 
 8* av fieylaroLS 1 overt /cat ti /allot aTOL? ovk eaTiv e\8co- 
 Xov ov8ev 7rpo? rov? avflpcoirov? elpyaafievov evapyco?, p. 28 
 ov 8c-Ly6evTos tt/v tov 7rvv6avofievov \j/V)(i]v 6 /3ouAo- 
 p.evo? a.7ro7rXr]p(oaaL, wpb? tcov alaOrjaecov Tiva irpocr- 
 
 4. ? H ttov] This is not really 
 inconsistent with Soph. 227a: 
 
 rfj tcov Xoycov p(668(0 anoyyio-Ti- 
 ktJs t) (fiap/JLaKOTrocriw: oi>8ev tjttov 
 ovbe ti paXXov Tvy\avei peXov. 
 
 In both cases it is the method 
 alone which gives importance 
 to the particular subject. 
 
 6. dAA', olpai, — \eyopeva ] 
 
 " But I think that it has es- 
 caped most men, that, while 
 some thiugs are endued with 
 resemblances which are sensi- 
 ble, and therefore easily known, 
 which there is no difficulty in 
 shewing, when one wishes to 
 point out any of them (n un- 
 derstood from nepl tov) to any 
 one who asks about it, with 
 no trouble, but easily, without 
 argument, — there are also 
 things, and those the greatest, 
 and of priceless worth, which 
 have no image wrought so as 
 to strike human perceptions, 
 
 by pointing to which he who 
 would content the mind of 
 an inquirer, shall fully satisfy 
 him by imprinting this on 
 some one of his senses. 
 Wherefore one ought to study 
 to be able to give and receive 
 a rational account of every- 
 thing, for things bodiless, which 
 are the fairest and the greatest 
 things, for the sake of which 
 all that is now said is spoken, 
 are made clearly manifest by 
 reason alone." Cf. supr. 277 c. 
 
 7. MSS. aloSrjTiKai. 
 
 10. padicos KaTapa6a.v~\ Per- 
 haps pqblois should be read, 
 with Hermanu and Badham. 
 Badham further conjectures ah 
 
 ovbiv xakiTTov o tl av avTwv tis 
 /3ov\rjdfj tco A. a. — evS(i£a(rdai. 
 
 But the whole sentence is la- 
 boured and pleonastic, so that 
 there is little cause for omit- 
 ting- an inconvenient word. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 Ill 
 
 86. appoTTOov, LKavcos 1 7rXrjpco(rei- 810 8ei /leXtTous Xoyov 
 €ko,<ttov bvvcLTOv eivai 8ovvai KCti Seijaadar ra yap 
 dacopara, KaXXiarra bvra kcu peyiara, Xoyco povov, 
 aAAw 8e ovdan aacfrco? SeiKwrai, tovtoov Se kvexa 
 iravr earl ra vvv Xeyopeva. pacov 8' iv toI? eXar- 
 b roaiv 7] peXeri] ttclvtos iripi pudXXov ?) irep\ ra 
 pelfa. 
 
 NE. 20. KdXXiar eW 
 
 SE. 'Oy roivvv yapiv airavO' rjpiv tout eppijOr] 
 7rep\ rovrcdv, pLpr/adcopeu. 
 
 NE. 20. Tivcov ; 
 
 SE. TavTrj? re ov\ iJKiara avrrj? eW/ca r^y 
 Svo"x<Ep€ias, r\v -fwepl-f Ti]v pcaKpoXoyiav rr\v irep\ 
 tt]v v(fiai>TiKr)i> airebe^dpeOa ftvcryepm, fcai rr]v Trepl 
 
 analogies 
 which can 
 only be ex- 
 argument. 
 
 Let us 
 recal the 
 io motive of 
 this digres- 
 sion. It 
 was chiefly 
 to calm the 
 disquiet 
 which we 
 felt at the 
 length to 
 which our 
 
 5. pdcov pdXXov 77] Cf. Pl*0- 
 
 tag. 317 c: nai evXaffeiav tcivttjv 
 oipat j3(\ti(o eKelvrjs eivai, to 6/j.o- 
 Xoyelv pdXXov rj etjapvov eivai. 
 
 12. Tavrr/s re — XeyotpevJ The 
 construction is obscured by 
 the attraction of the latter 
 part of the sentence into the 
 relative clause. Strict syntax 
 would require TavTrjs re — kql 
 7-775 (Svo-^fpet'as) irepl ttjv (paKpo- 
 Xoylav} nep\ ttjv tov tmvtos k.t.X.: 
 
 instead of which the latter 
 clause, with what follows, is 
 made to depend on dnedegapeda 
 8vax e pus, with wdiich the re- 
 mainder of the sentence, ewoovv- 
 
 res — Kal eneTrX^apev k.t.X., is 
 
 also connected. 
 
 13. rjv + irepl + ttjv paKpoXo- 
 yiav] Hermann suggests rjvnep. 
 Wagner, Rheinische Museum, 
 vol. xii. (1857) p. 309, prefers 
 finep. This avoids the, collo- 
 cation of the two accusatives, 
 which is the objection to fjvnep. 
 
 But fjv is unobjectionable. Cf. 
 Soph. 264 b : ttjp TrpoadoKiav rjv 
 e(pol3i]8r)p.ev, and note. Gorg. 
 
 509 C : ravTTjv eivai ttjv ala- 
 xLo~T-qv (Bofjdeiav pf] 8vvao-0ai j8o- 
 
 r)6elv. Also Legj 
 
 666 b 
 
 ttjv — naididv, *]v toIs dvdpdmois 
 iirinovpov ttjs tov yr]pa>s avarrjpo- 
 rrjTos e8a>pr)0-aTO tov oivov cpdp- 
 pattov. And nepl also may be 
 defended if we suppose a7re- 
 
 8ei-dpe8a 8vaxepa>s (sc. ttjv paK- 
 
 poXoyiav) to be substituted for 
 ibvo-xepdvapev. Such a change 
 in the form of a sentence will 
 not astonish the attentive stu- 
 dent of these dialogues. 
 
 Plato here seems determined 
 to "bestow all his tediousness" 
 on his critics, whoever they 
 were. 
 
 fiaKpoXoylav] " Lengthiness 
 in argument," not in speech, as 
 in Gorg. 461 d, alib. 
 
 14. dne8e£dpe8a Sucr^epwy (sc. 
 
 7-171/ pciKpoXoyiav) is unexpectedly 
 
112 
 
 nAATONO^ 
 
 remarks on 
 weaving, as 
 well as the 
 m\ tliu hich 
 preceded, 
 and the 
 discussion 
 Oil tlie na- 
 ture of the 
 Sophist l had 
 been Bpun : 
 by shewing 
 that length 
 was not 
 lengthinesa 
 unless ex- 
 ceeding 
 what is 
 meet. 
 
 Tiju tov iravTos dveiXitjiv kcu tyjv tov ao(f)icrTOv p. 281 
 iripi rr/s tov urj ovto? ovcrias, ivvoovvTes co? ^X e 
 /ii]ko? irXtov, kcu eiri tovtois Sr) iracnv eireirXrj^aptv 
 fjfuv avTois, SeiaavTe? prj irepiepya dpa kcu fxaKpa c 
 5 Xeyotpev. iv ovv elaavOis prjdev Trct.o-yodp.tv tolov- 
 tov, tovtcov eveKct ttolvtcov tol irpocrOev vcov eiprjaOcu 
 
 NE. 20. Tolvt ecrTai. Ae'ye e£f}s uovov. 
 
 HE. Aeyco tolvvv otl ypr) $V fJL€/xvrj/JL€vovs ifJL€ kcu 
 
 10 ere tcov vvv elprjuevcov tov re yj/oyov eKtxaTOTe kcu 
 
 kircuvov TTOieicrOcu fipayyTYjTOS dpa kcu pr]KOvs d>v civ 
 
 del irepi Xeycop.ev, p.rj 7rpb? aXXrjXa tol p.r\Kr\ Kpi- 
 
 VOVT€S, dXXd KCLTCC TO Tr)$ peTprjTLKY}? ptpOS, T0T6 
 
 e(f>afi€U 8etv pLep.vrja6ai, irpos to irpeirov. d 
 
 15 NE. 212. 'OpOm. 
 
 HE. 06 TOLVVV OvSe 7T/00? TOVTO TTCLVTO.. 0VT€ ydp 
 
 Substituted for ebvaxepdvapev '. 
 
 hence the introduction of 
 Trept. 
 
 1. dvei\i£iv] Supr. 269 e. 
 Ttjv (sc. fiaKpoXoyiav). 
 
 tov ao(pi(TTOv 7rept] It is 
 
 better to take Tre'pi thus with 
 tov o-oqbio-Tov, in which case it 
 can easily be resumed with the 
 explanatory words tjjs tov prj 
 ovtos ovaias. Otherwise the 
 preceding dialogue would be 
 referred to as 6 arocpurr^s, a 
 form of reference which has 
 no parallel in Plato. Cf. supr. 
 284 b : iv ra o-ocpiaTjj, and 
 note. 
 
 6. tovt<ov — iravTav\ " The 
 above-mentioned and all simi- 
 lar arguments." 
 
 13. Tore] Supr. 284, 285. 
 
 14. u€pvr}a6cu] One is at first 
 sight inclined to read perp«- 
 
 o~0ai, after the conjecture of 
 Schleiermacher, and to sup- 
 pose that an error has grown 
 out of fivr)o-8£)fxev, pepvrjpevovs 
 
 above. But the text is seen 
 to be perfectly sound when a 
 comma is placed after fie/ivrj- 
 o~6ai, and 7rp6s to itpiirov is thus 
 joined with to. prjicr) KpivovTes. 
 The opening of the next speech 
 favours this view. And in 
 support of ueuvrjadcu, cf. supr. 
 284 c : vnoTLdeo-dai 10s ttots 8e- 
 t](Tfi tov vvv Xf^^eVros. 285 b : 
 (pv\aTTcopev — on 8vo yevrj Tr)s 
 peTprjTcurjs — Ka\ a (papev avTas 
 civai pep.vap.eda. N. 2. pepvrjo-6- 
 peda. 
 
 16. Ov Toivvv ov8e 7rpos tovto 
 
 rrdvTa] " Not, however, even 
 with a view to this in all 
 things. The standard by which 
 arguments are to be measured 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 113 
 
 l86. irpos rr]v rjdovyv prjKov? apporrovTos ovdev 7rpoa8er}- 
 aofxeda, ttXyjv el pa) irapepyov rC to re av 7rpb? 
 Tijv tov TTpofiXrjQevTos ^Ttjaiv, cos' av parrra koll 
 ra^iara evpoipiev, devrepov aXK ov npcoTov 6 Aoyos? 
 ayairav irapayyeXXei, iroXv 8e paXiara Kai TTpcoTOVb 
 tyjv p.e0o8ov auri]U ripcav tov kolt e\8r\ 8vvarov eivai 
 o Siaipeii>, kou 8r) Kai Xoyov, av re 7rapLp.r)Kr)9 Xe\6e\s 
 
 And yet 
 qo< "meet 1 
 for plea- 
 sure, nor 
 
 evi n Eor 
 discovery, 
 
 I. in Eor i be 
 
 I ml ul dl 
 
 relopiag 
 
 tic.-il me- 
 thod and 
 of making 
 
 is that which is becoming 
 or suitable, not with a view 
 to pleasure, or persuasion, 
 or gracefulness, but to the 
 awakening of reason and the 
 furtherance of truth." Cf. 
 Legg. 2, 655 C : \eyovcri ye ol 
 jrXeio-rot povo-LKrjs opdoT-qra eivai 
 rrju r]8ovi)v rals ^i^ais 7ropi£ovo~av 
 SvvapiV dWa Toi/TO p.ev ovre av- 
 €Ktov ovre oaiov to Tvapdnau (p6ey- 
 
 yeo-dai. We might be disposed 
 to conjecture navrrj, but wdvTa 
 is used elsewhere adverbially. 
 Soph. 233 a: cos elal Tvdvra ttuv- 
 t<ov avrol ao<pu>Taroi. 
 
 (16.) ovre yap — \6ya>v~\ "For 
 first we shall have no need 
 of a length that is suitable 
 for pleasure, unless merely by 
 the way : and our argument 
 further enjoins that Ave esteem 
 only as of secondary import- 
 ance that which helps investi- 
 gation and facilitates and 
 hastens discovery, but that 
 we should prize by far most 
 highly, and in the first place, 
 the method itself and the 
 power of dividing according 
 to the real species, and feel 
 an interest in that discourse 
 which makes the hearer more 
 inventive, whether it be brief 
 or interminable alike : more- 
 over, that the man who blames 
 lengthiness (d8o\eo-xiav) in this 
 
 kind of intercourse, and is in- 
 tolerant of circuitous digres- 
 sions, ought not so cpiickly 
 and all at once to have done 
 when he has blamed the dis- 
 course as long, but should con- 
 sider that it is his duty to shew 
 further that a shorter one woidd 
 have made those conversing 
 better reasoners, and would 
 have improved their power of 
 finding a mode of declaring 
 realities by speech : all other 
 blames aud praises, made with 
 reference to any other stand- 
 ard, our argument bids us dis- 
 regard and to seem deaf to any 
 such remarks." 
 
 1. prjKOVS Cipp-OTTOVTOs] Cf. 
 
 Phileb. 36 d : xa'ipeiv Set \eyeiu 
 Tois ciXhovs prjK((Tiv rj Kai otcoovv 
 twu Ttapa to irpoo-rJKOV Xeyopevcov. 
 
 lb. 28 d. Rep. 5, 450 b, Legg. 
 1, 640 a, b. 
 
 2. TrXrjv el firj] See Lobeck 
 ad Phrynich. p. 459, who ad- 
 duces Ar. de An. I. 3 : tt'Ktjv el 
 pfj Kara arvpftefiriKus. The greater 
 frequency of the expression in 
 later Greek throws some doubt 
 on the few instances of it in 
 Attic Greek which, like the pre- 
 sent, have full MS. authority. 
 
 to Te\ Sc. prjuos dppoTTOv. 
 
 6. TT\v pedoBov — tov — BwaTov 
 elvai] Cf. Ale. 115 b : Kara rfju 
 eni\eipT]0'iv tov craxreu ovs eSet. 
 
1 14 
 
 IIAATQNOS 
 
 men inven 
 
 Boners. 
 To return, 
 
 :,n,l apply 
 
 our ex- 
 ample. 
 
 Kingcraft 
 has been 
 distin- 
 guished 
 
 from other 
 artsof tend- 
 ing ani- 
 mals in 
 herds. 
 But there 
 remain 
 those arts, 
 both opera- 
 tive and 
 assistant, 
 which are 
 found 
 within the 
 state. 
 
 tov aKovauvra evpeTtKcoTepov aTrepyaip-jTut, tovtov p- 
 airovbd^Lv kcu tu> /jli]K€l firjdev dyavaKTelv, av r av 
 fipa)(VT€po?, axravTW eri 8 av wpo? tovtol? tov 
 nepl ra? TOtdaBe orvvovcrlas \j/eyovTa Xoyoov pyKr) 
 5 kcu ray ev kvkXco rreptodovs ovk dirodexoLievov, otl 
 
 )(py) TOV T0L0VT0V fXY] TTOLVV TU)(V pL1]8 6v6vS OVT00 
 
 peOievai xj/e^avra \xovov cos" fxaKpd to. XeyOevTa, aXXa p. 
 kcu 7rpoo-a7ro(paLveiv oiecrOai Selv oos fipayyTepa av 
 yevofxeva tov? avvovTas direipyd^eTO SiaXeKTiKcoTe- 
 
 io povs Kal Trjs tcov ovtcov Xoyco Si^Xcocreaos evpeTiKcoTe- 
 povs, tcov <5e aXXcov koll irpos aXK aTTa \j/6ycov Kal 
 eiraivcov Lirjbev (ppovTiQiv Lir/8e to irapditav aKOveiv 
 SokeIv tcov toiovtcov Xoycov. Kal tovtcov fxev aXts. 
 el Ka\ cro\ TavTjj ijvvdoKel' Trpbs Se 8r) tov ttoXltlkov 
 
 i$\cQLiev iraXiv, tt)s 7rpoppr)de[ar)9 ixpavTLKi]^ avTco <pe- b 
 povTts to 7rapd8eiyfAa. 
 
 NE. 212. KaAco? eiireS) ko! 7roicop.ev a Xeyeis. 
 SE. Ovkovv cctto ye tcov 7roXXcov 6 fiacriXevs ocrac 
 
 1 . tovtov crnovbd^e iv\ This 
 construction appears in Gorg. 
 500 C : ov ti av fiaXXov o~7rov$d- 
 o-eie Tis, as well as in Soph. 
 251 c, 259 c Compare L egg. 
 
 7 , 7 9 2 c : ° j^" y a p epos 8r] 
 Xoyoy ov6" fjdovds (prjat 8e2v bicoKeiv 
 tov 6p8bv j3lov ovt av to napdwav 
 (jievyeiv tus Xvnas, dXX' ai/TO 
 do-na£eo-8ai to p.e'crov, o vvv 6>; 
 Trpoaelnov cos iXecov ovoiidaas. 
 
 2. av t av ftpaxvTepos] Sc. 
 "XexOeis. 
 
 3. tov — \j/eyovTa] We seem to 
 detect in these words an apolo- 
 getic tone. Comp. Gorg. 453 b. 
 
 5. oTi xph T0V toiovtov] These 
 words depend immediately on 
 
 6 Aoyos rrapayyeXXa. 
 
 6. irdvv Taxv] Bodl. TTavTa\v. 
 
 7. peBUvai] Cf. Phileb. 16 e : 
 
 els to aneipov peBevra x ai P el - v eav. 
 
 IO. Trjs — 8r)Xcoarecos] This is 
 probably a genitive of respect. 
 Xoyco depends on the verbal 
 meaning in SrjXcocrecos. 
 
 1 2. <ppovTi£eiv again depends 
 
 On napayyeXXet. 
 
 15- avTco (pepovres to napd- 
 8eiyp,a ] " Applying to him 
 ( = imcpepovTes) out example." 
 Cf. supr. 278 e. The dative 
 is probably dativus commodi, 
 " Bringing for his benefit." 
 Hence there is perhaps a touch 
 of liveliness in the omission of 
 the preposition. 
 
 I 8. Ovkovv and ye tcov noXXtov] 
 
 Supr. 
 
 '6 a. 
 
 ocrat £vvvop.oc] Sc. Te^ac. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 115 
 
 287. £vvvo/ioi, fiaWov 8e diro iraawv tcqv rrepi rds dye'Aas 
 8LaKe\(opLaraL. Xolttcu 8e', (jyapev, at Kara ttqXlv av- 
 ttjv rcov re IjvvaiTiGov koll tcov alrlcov, as irpwras air 
 dXXrjXoov Siaipereov. 
 
 NE. SO. 'Op6m. 
 
 HE. OlaO' ovv otl ^(aXe7rbv auras rep.elv dl^a ; 
 to 5' a'lTiov, cos olpai, irpoiovaiv ov\ lyrrov earat 
 kot agaves. 
 
 c NE. 20. OvKOVV XPV $Py- v 0VTCD9. 
 
 £?E. Kara /xe'A?; roivvv avrds olov iepehv diaipoo- 
 p.e$a, e7ret8y St.)(a dSvvaTovpev. del yap els rov eyyv- 
 rara o rt paXuna re/xveiv dpiOpbv del. 
 
 NE. 20. Yloos ovv 7roLcofiev rd vvv ; 
 
 S?E. 'Qcrirep epnvpoudev, b-nbcrai irapelyovTO op- 
 yava irepl ttjv v(j)avTiK7jv, irdaas Sr}7rov Tore eriQepev 
 cos avvaiTiovs. 
 
 NE. 20. Na/. 
 
 SE. Kal vvv Sr) ravTov pev tovto, en 8e ptaXXov 
 
 10 These, for 
 reasons 
 
 which will 
 appear as 
 we proceed, 
 do not ad- 
 mit of di- 
 chotomy, 
 but must 
 be carved, 
 1 5 like a sacri- 
 fice, in 
 several 
 joints. 
 
 There are, 
 first, in- 
 struments : 
 
 " That occupy part of the same 
 field :" with a slight etjmiolo- 
 gical allusion to fopevTiKt], The 
 comparison of infr. 289 b shews, 
 however, that the word is not 
 to be taken actively or accented 
 £vvv6[ioi. 
 
 7. to 8' aiTLOV — Kara<fiaves] 
 
 I, e. The enumeration itself 
 (avTr) fj BiegoSos) will shew that 
 the analysis cannot be carried 
 further. 
 
 9. 8pav ovras] npo'ievai. 
 
 10. olov Upelov] Cf. Phsedr. 
 265 e : Ka\ prj enixcipe'i-v Kara- 
 yvvvai pepos pr]8ev kcikov payetpov 
 
 Tponco xpwpevov. The same image 
 occurs in Emped. Fr. 1. 86 : 
 yva>6i 8iarpi]6evTus ivi anXdy- 
 
 xvoio-i Xoyoto, with a further 
 allusion to divination. 
 
 11. Set yap] Cf. once more 
 Phileb. 16 d : 8vo, etnas elai, 
 o-Koireh, el 8e prj, rpels fj tlv liXXov 
 apidpov. 
 
 15. 8f)7rov] Bodl. 8e TTOV. 
 
 1 8. TCIVTOV peV TOVTO, STl 8£ 
 
 paXkov] For the slight inex- 
 actness of pev and 8e, cf. The«t. 
 150 b : to pev t<j)v paicov Toaov- 
 tov, eXaTTOv 8e tov e'pov 8pdpciTOs. 
 
 %ti 8e paXXov] Because they 
 are no less indispensable, and 
 are still less to be confounded 
 with the art itself. Cf. Bep. 
 
 2, 370 C : 6 yap yecopyos, cos 
 eoiicev, ovk ovtos TroirjcreTai eavroo 
 to ciporpov k.t.X. 
 
 Q 2 
 
1 l(i 
 
 riAATONOS 
 
 y rod' yplv iroirjTtov. oaai yap apiKpbv i) peya tl p. 28 
 8i]/j.iovpyov<Ti Kara. iroXiv opyavov, Oereov airaaas (l 
 ravras co? ovcras auvaiTiov?. avev yap tovtcov ovk 
 
 CLV 7TOT6 ytVOLTO TToXlS 0V$€ TToXlTLKT), TOVTCOV 6° ai) 
 
 5 (3aai\iKr)? epyov Tt)(yr]? ovdev irov 6r]o~op.ev. 
 
 NE. 2a Ov yap. 
 
 HE. Kal pev 8rj ^aAe7rov £irL)(eLpovp.€V hpuv 
 a.7ro-)(top'i-{pvTes tovto dwo tcov aXXcov to yevos' 
 o tl yap ovv tcov ovtoov * eanu coy * eVoy y( 
 10 TLV09 opyavov tiirovTa SoKelv eiprjKtvaL tl inQavdv. 
 ojitcoy <5e tTepov av tcov iv ttoXcl KTrjpaTCov eL7roop.ev e 
 ToSe. 
 
 NE. 212. To iToiov ; 
 
 SE. 'Oy ot»/c eo-n TavTT)v ttjv hvvap.iv e)(ov. ov 
 
 4. tovtcov 8' aw — ^cro/xei 1 ] 
 
 " Nor, again, shall we rank 
 any one of these things as a 
 function of the regal art." 
 
 9. o tl yap ovv — ividavov ] 
 
 The words as they stand in 
 the MSS. {cos eariv evos ye tl- 
 vos opyavov) give no construc- 
 tion to SoKelv. Stephanus 
 read ecm for 6,n, which can- 
 not be spared. Ast supplied 
 Set ; Stallbaurn, avay^ ; Her- 
 mann omits cby ; Wagner, in 
 Eheinsch. Mus. vol. xii. (1857) 
 p. 307, reads So/cel. The com- 
 parison of Legg. 4, 709 b — to 8' 
 efori nepl re vavTikiav Ka\ Kvfisp- 
 vrjTiKTjv Ka\ laTpiKrjV Ka\ crTpaTrj- 
 yiKrjv ncivTa TavT eiTTOi'Ta ooKe.Ii/ 
 eu XeyeiK. aXXa yap ollolcos koX 
 roSe eon Xeyorra eu \4yeiv — 
 leaves no doubt that Hermann's 
 (which is nearly that of Ste- 
 phanus) is the right method. 
 But as is to be retained by 
 being placed after eariv. Cf. 
 
 Legg. 6, 768 C : a 817 cpap.ev oid' 
 cos dp^as ovd' cos prj pqdiov el- 
 TTovTa dvup.(pio-(3r]Tr)Tcos elprjKevcu. 
 Crat. 404 b : Ar/prjTTjp <PalveT<u 
 — cos pr}Trjp Kc-Kkrjadai, and supr. 
 eTi6ep,ev cos crvvaiTiovs, infr. 289c, 
 291 a, supr. 281 a, b, Phasdo 
 99 b. For the position of eo-rt, 
 cf. Legg. 6, 769 c : olds re els 
 to irpocrQev eorcu (paibpvvcov ttoi- 
 elv eni8i86vai. Bodl. MS. cos e'crri 
 without accent. 
 
 1 1 . e'iircopev To8e] " Let US Say 
 
 what follows regarding another 
 of the possessions that are in 
 a city." "Say what?" "That it 
 has not this power" (i. e. is not 
 iroXiTiKr). Cf. infr. : Kal ttj C T ) T01 '- 
 p-ivrj ye npocrr^Kov ovhev dre)(vcos 
 
 emo-Tr]prj). " For it is not com- 
 pacted with a view to being 
 employed in production, as was 
 the case with the genus instru- 
 ment, but for the preservation 
 or retention of what has been 
 made." 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 117 
 
 87. yap €7ri yevecrem alria 7rr)yi>vTai, KaOdirzp opyavov, 
 aAA' eW/ca rod SypuovpyijOevros arcoTrjpias. 
 
 NE. 20. To ttoZov ; 
 
 SE. Tovro o Sr) ijypoi? kcu vypois [kol epirvpois 
 kcu airvpoi$\ TravToSawov eiSo? epyaaOev, dyyeiov 5 
 "j~b Srff fiia KArjaei irpootpOeyyoiieOa, kol paXa ye 
 avyyov ddos kol rfj ^rjTOup.evrj ye, coy olficu, rrpoa- 
 $88. yjkov ovbev dre^vm eTnaT-qpy). 
 
 NE. 20. ricoy ydp ov ; 
 
 37E. Tovtgw Srj rpirov erepov eiSos KTr/parcov 10 
 7rdfjL7ro\v koltotttIov ire^bv kol evvSpov kol ttoXv- 
 
 Thinlly, 
 platforms, 
 
 or vehicles : 
 
 I. e7Tt yevecrecos atrt'a] " Pro- 
 ductionis causa." inl as in eVi 
 rex v ll pavddvei. alria as 111 
 hv ot) av irepi air lav e^et? 8ia- 
 
 ipepeiv. I. e. With the view of 
 having production referred to 
 them. 
 
 4. Tovto — 7rpoa(pdeyy6pedaj 
 This place also appears easilyre- 
 medi able by rejecting the second 
 6 8rj, which is either a gloss or a 
 clerical error. Stallb. is wrong 
 in saying that two arts must 
 be developed here. (How would 
 he distinguish ipyaXeiov from 
 opyavov '?) The opyavov has been 
 already distinguished, though 
 with difficulty, as a separate 
 kind, being lightly passed over 
 because already spoken of under 
 vcpavriKT), and that here named 
 (dyyelov) has been previously 
 spoken of as erepov, " a second." 
 The next is therefore properly 
 introduced as rpirov. 
 
 [kgu epTrvpois Ka\ dn-upoic]] 
 
 For things prepared by fire 
 and not so prepared. Thus 
 caldrons and pitchers are both 
 included. In Legg. 3, 679 a, 
 
 ctkcvcov epirvpcov re nai airvpcov, 
 
 the distinction is made between 
 pottery and wickerwork, the 
 former of which is baked and 
 will bear heat. 
 
 9. Tlcos yap ov;] Sc. e'mcopev 
 cos ovk ion ravrrjv rr)v ovvap.iv 
 
 '4x°v. This form of assent to a 
 negative proposition has been 
 questioned, and ttcos yap, itcos 
 yap ovv, ncos yap civ, suggested. 
 But for a similar inexactness 
 in reply, if this be inexactness, 
 
 cf. Gorg. 467 e : T Ap' ovv ecrn 
 Tt, rcov ovrcov, o ou^i rjroi dyadov 
 y eo~r\v i] Kaicov r) pera^v rovrcov, 
 ovre ayaOov ovre kokov ; II. 7roAAi) 
 avdyKTi, co 2. (sc. pr) elval Tt rcov 
 ovrcov o etc.) 
 
 1 O. Tovrcov 81) — ycyvopevov ] 
 
 " And there is a third kind 
 of possessions, different from 
 these and very extensive, which 
 we must descry, on land and 
 on water, perambulatory and 
 stationary, honourable and dis- 
 honoured, to which one name 
 is given, because it is always 
 intended to be sat upon, and 
 is a seat for some one." 
 
sports 
 
 1 1 8 I1AATQN02 
 
 7rXave$ kou dirXaves koll ti/xlov koll utl/xov, ev oe p. ->!• 
 wofj-a e'xov, 8lotl irdv Ivskol tlvos €(jje8pa? earl, Oolkos 
 dei tlvl yiyvofxevov. 
 NE. 20. To irolov ; 
 5 HE. ' O^ifpa avro ttov Xeyopev, ol> Tra^f ttoXltl- 
 Kr/? epyov, dXXa pcaXXov ttoXv tcktovlkt]? koll Kepa- 
 
 LiLKT]? KOLL Xa7\K0TV1TLKr)S. 
 
 NE. 20. MavOavoo. 
 Fourthly, ££E. T7 oe rerapTOV : dp' erepov elvou tovtidv }> 
 
 defences; / , T x „/,■„/ , 
 
 ioAeKreo^, eV co tol TrXeiara iari tcov iraXai prjdevTcov, 
 eadrjs re ^vpiraaa koll tcov 07rXcov to 7roXv koll rel)(r] 
 ttolvtol 0' oaa yr/iva 7repil3XrjLiaTa kou XiQiva, koll 
 fxvpia erepa ; TrpofioX-qs 8e eW/ca {jvLnravTcov avTcov 
 elpyaapievcov diKouorar dv oXov irpoaayopevoiTO irpo- 
 
 i5/3A?7pa, kou 7roAAc5 piaXXov reyyiqs oiKoSopuKrjs epyov 
 kou v<pai>TiKrj9 to ttXucttov volllC^olt dv bpOorepov r) 
 
 TToXlTLKYj?. 
 
 NE. 20. Yldw pL€V OVV. 
 Fifthly, AE. YlefXTTTOV 8e dp OLV £6eXoiLl€V TO TTtpi TOV C 
 
 ioKoap.ov kou ypa(f)iKT)v Oeivai kou oaa tclvty) irpoa^pco- 
 fjLeva kou pLovatKrj LiiLirjLiaTa TeXeiTcu, irpo? to:? r)8ova? 
 
 I. rifiiov Kai ciripov] Cf. rrpo- g. Tt 8e Teraprov;] Cf. Gorg. 
 
 e8pia, Trpcorov £v\ov. Horn. II. 474 C: rl he 8r/ alo-\iov ; norepov 
 
 M. 3II : TeTiprjpeada paXiara k.t.'X. 
 
 eSpy re Kpiaalv re K.r.A. Dio IO. t£>v Trakai prjdevrav] Supr. 
 
 Cass. 58, 18 : eopat. re anpoi Kai 279, 280. 
 
 crraaeis iirovdbiaTOi. 1 1. tcov oirhav to 7roAii] I. e. 
 
 6. paWov 7roXu] Cf. supr. Defensive armour. 
 
 275 c, and note. 16. to w\f7o-Tov] " Most," 
 
 K(papiKr]i\ The exact bear- not " all." Not 6-n\oirouKr], for 
 
 ing of this would be more evi- example. 
 
 dent if we knew more of the 6p66repov pleonastically re- 
 details of Greek life. sumes ttoKv paXXov, as suiting 
 
 7. x a ^ K0TV7riK 'i s ] By which better with vopi^oir av. 
 chariots, for example, are made. 
 
flOAITIKOS. 
 
 11!) 
 
 1I288. fxovov n)fjLcoi> aTreipyao-fitva, SiKaicos 0" av bvofxari 
 TrepiXrjCJiOevTa kvi ; 
 
 NE. 2Q. Uotcp ; 
 
 SE. Yiaiyvibv 7rov tl Xeyerai. 
 
 NE. 20. 17 ixr]v ; 5 
 
 SE. Touro Toivvv tovtoi9 ei> bvofia anraai 7rpe\j/€i 
 irpoaayoptvOeV ov yap cnrovdrj? oiideu olvtwv xapiv, 
 aXKa 7rai8La? evtKa iravra hparai. 
 cl NE. 20. Kai tovto cr^eSo^ en p.av6dv(o. 
 
 3?E. To Se 77W4 tovtois aco/iara irape^ov, e£ &v 10 
 /cat eV o!y 8r)piovpyov(riv biroaai twv re^vcov vvv ei- 
 prjvrat, 7ra.vT08a.7rbv elSo?, ttoWwv irepcov reyvcov 
 tKyovov ov, ap oi>x Iktov 6y]aop.ev ; 
 
 Sixthly, 
 
 materials, 
 (which 
 should 
 have been 
 
 put first :) 
 
 4. HaLyviov tvov tl] "There 
 is such a word in use as 
 'child's-play.'" Cf. Soph. 226 
 b : Xeyofiev. We have here 
 the larger kind, of which p.i- 
 fxrjrtKrj is part. Cf. Soph. 234 
 b : natdias he ex els tf Tl Te X vl ~ 
 Kwrepov t) Kai xapu'&Tepov eihos 
 
 1) TO pipTJTLKOV j 
 
 IO. To he nao-L tovtois awfiaTti 
 napexov] This (if earlier than 
 the Timseus) is probably a 
 nearer approach than philo- 
 sophy had hitherto made to 
 the distinction of matter and 
 form, of which the doctrine of 
 elements in the earlier Greek 
 philosophy was the anticipa- 
 tion. The aneipov of the Phi- 
 lebus (see esp. 25 c) is a more 
 abstract mode of the same 
 conception, taken from Pytha- 
 gorean philosophy (cf. ib. 54 c: 
 
 yeveo-ecos p.ev eveKa (pappaKa tc 
 /cai wdvTa opyava Kai Trdo~av vkrjv 
 TvapaTiOeadaL iracnv) : and the 
 
 notion of formless matter oc- 
 
 curs once again in the Timseus, 
 in a passage of which the germ 
 may be found in the text, 49 a: 
 
 vvv 8' 6 Xoyoy eoiKev elaavay- 
 Ka£eiv x a ^* 7 > ov Kai apvhpbv eihos 
 emxeipe'iv Aoyoty ep.<pav'io~ai. Tiva 
 ovv 'e\ov hiivap.lv Ka\ (pvcriv avTO 
 VTroXrjTTTeov j TOidvhe p-dXiaTa, 
 Tvdo-rfs eivai yevecrecos vTrohoxrjv 
 avro, oiov Ti6rjvr)v K.r.A. Cf. Ar. 
 Pol. I. 3 (8) : Ka), el v7rrjpeTiK7], 
 
 TTOTepOV CDS Tj KepKlhoTTOUKT] TT] 
 
 vfyavTiKi], rj cos t; x n ^- KUV Py LK ^ T .7 
 dvhpiavTOTToua' ov yap coaavTcos 
 vnrjpeTovo'iv, aXX f] pev opyava 
 7rape^et, 17 he tt)v v\tjv. Xe'yco he 
 vXtjv to vnoKeipevov, e'tj ov tc 
 aTTOTeXelTai e'pyov, oiov iicpdvTjj 
 p.ev epia, dvhpiavTOTroicp he ^nA«dV. 
 
 11. ev oh] Matter is that 
 in which art works as well as 
 out of which art produces. Cf. 
 Phileb. 59 d : Kaddnep hrjpiovp- 
 yols fjpiv, e£ cov i] iv ois hel 
 hrjpiovpye'tv ti, TrapaKeloSai. 
 
 12. noXXcbv eTepcov rexveov eK- 
 
 yovov ov ] Hence it appears 
 
320 
 
 flAATQNOS 
 
 NE. 2Q. Uolov 81) \eyeis ; 
 
 3;E. X/oucrof re /ecu apyvpov kgli ttolvO oirocra 
 peraWeveTai, kou oaa 8pvoTO/JUKrj kou Kovpd ^uparacra 
 T€fxvovcra irapiyei T€ktovikt) kou TrAeKTiKr), kou kri 
 5 ([)XoLariKrj (j)vTa>i> re kou e/x\|/u^a)^ Sep/iara awp.drow 
 Trepioupovaa aKVTOTopuKT], kou octou 7rep\ ra tololvt 
 elal riyyou, kou (f)e\\cov kou (3v(3Aooi> kou 8eap.wu 
 epyacTTLKai, irapeayov 8-qpiovpyuv avvOtra e'/c p.rj 
 crvvTiOefitvcDV €'i8r] yevwv. eV -5e avro irpoaayopevu>fxev 
 \ottolv to TrpaiToyeves dvOpojirois Krrj/jLa, kou dtvvOtrov 
 kou /3a<riAiKr]? en-KTrrj/Ar)? ovSapLw? epyov ov. 
 
 that matter is a relative no- 
 tion : for which thought, see 
 also Tim. 49 b, c. 
 
 2. Xpvaou yevcov ] "I 
 
 mean gold and silver and 
 all mineral productions, and 
 all that wood-cutting and 
 eveiy sort of cutting provides 
 for the arts of carpentry 
 and plaiting ; and all wherein 
 the process of harking, ship- 
 ping off the cuticle of plants, 
 and the currier's art, denud- 
 ing animals of theirs, and the 
 other arts connected with such 
 produce, that manufacture 
 corks and papyrus and fasten- 
 ings, provide for the manufac- 
 ture of composite species from 
 simple kinds." Note the rhythm 
 of the concluding words. 
 
 The structure resembles 
 
 Soph. 227 a : Ka\ t5>v d\l/i>xc0V 
 aiopdraiv (icaOapiTcis) , hv yuacpev- 
 tikt] kci\ £vpirao~a KocrprjTtKi) rrjv ini- 
 jxiXaav TrapexopevT] Kara apiKpa, 
 7roAAa Ka\ yeXola 8okovvtci ovdpara 
 
 e<T)(6v. So here : /cat (pXoio-TiKr] 
 
 nepiatpovcra K.r.A. Trapto~)(ov. 
 
 The words from <a\ downwards 
 
 are part of the relative clause, 
 though not to be construed 
 strictly with oaa. Compare 
 the order of words in Legg. 6, 
 779 d : irdpra baa 8i8aaKa\el.a 
 KareaKevuapeva Trepipevei toiis 
 <poiTT]Tds Ka\ 6earas Oiarpa. lb. 
 873d: iv tois ra>v 8<$8eKa opioiai 
 pepav. 
 
 3. Kovpd] E. g. the cutting 
 of osiers and brushwood, the 
 mowing of grass and reaping 
 of straw, the cropping of 
 horses' and camels' hair, the 
 shearing of sheep. 
 
 7. 8eo-pcbv] Such as glue 
 and thread. 
 
 IO. to npa>Toyev€S dvOpatnois 
 
 KTTJpu] The first-born of hu- 
 man possessions, because ne- 
 cessary to the production of 
 all else. The word is a rare 
 one, and occurs in the Orphic 
 verses, where also Nature 
 
 ((£ucm) is called npcDToyeveia. 
 
 It seems probable that Plato 
 had this, in common with 
 other terms employed in these 
 dialogues, from a Pythagorean 
 source. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 121 
 
 i88 
 
 NE. 2Q. KaXm. 
 
 S'E. Trjv <5?) rrjs rpo(j)r)s KTrjaii 1 , kou oau ek to 
 au>pa ^vyKarapLyvvpeva eavTwv pepeai peprj aoopa- 
 T09 €L9 to OepaTrevaai. Tiva hvva\xiv e'/A^e, XtKTtov 
 89. efiSofXOV ovopaaavTas avTO ^vp-rvav i]p<hv eivai Tpo- 1 
 (pov, el yu?7 tl kolXXlov e^opev aXXo 6ea6at. yeoopyiKfj 
 8e kolI OrjpevTLKr) kou yvpvao-TLKr\ koll laTpiKrj kou 
 p.ay€LpLKTj irav viroTiOevTes bpOoTtpov anroScoaopLev 77 
 Trj 7roXiTLKrj. 
 
 NE. SO. ITwy yap ov ; 
 
 SE. ^xeSoz/ To'ivvv oo~a €)(eTai KTrjaeco?, irXr)v 
 
 TWV 7]pL€pC0l> £(OCQl>, lv T0VT0L9 llTTOL ol/JLGU yeVtCTLV 
 
 elprjcrOai. aKowei 8e' rjv yap SiKaioTaTa pli> av TeOlv 
 
 b /car' apxas to TrpcoToyeves elSo?, /xercc Se tovto op- 
 
 yavov, ayyeiov, oxypa, 7rp6(3Xr)p,a, iraiyviov, Opeppa. 
 
 irapaXeLTTopev Se el tl prj peya XeXrjOev eh tl tov- 
 
 Sevi ntlil;. . 
 nourish- 
 ments. 
 
 Into these 
 seven kin ds 
 all posses- 
 sions ex- 
 cept living 
 creatures 
 can, by 
 hook or 
 5 by crook, 
 be distri- 
 buted. 
 
 3. eavTav fxepeai] The po- 
 sition of eavT&v pepecriv, which 
 is for the sake of emphasis, 
 determines the order of the 
 following words. The whole is 
 a periphrasis for (pdppaKa. 
 
 peprj aaparos eh to 6epa- 
 7rev(rai hvvap.iv riva] Note the 
 
 invei*sion : for 8w. r. eh to 6ep. 
 
 0-copa.TOs peprj. 
 
 7. yvp.va.aTiK.fi] Because the 
 trainer prescribes a certain 
 diet. 
 
 II. ova e)(eTai /cr^o-ews] Cf. 
 Thefet. 145 a : ova. re iraidelas 
 e)(eTai, alib. 
 
 13. rjv yap] " For we had, 
 what would rightly have been 
 placed first, the primitialkind." 
 
 15. Gpeppa] "Nourishment." 
 This meaning is not noticed in 
 the Lexicons, but Stallbaum 
 
 well compares the use of yev- 
 vrjpa in Soph. 266 d. Both 
 uses originate in the " cog- 
 nate" object of the active 
 becoming the subject of the 
 passive voice. 6peppa retains 
 a verbal signification also in 
 Legg. 7, 789 b : Tpecpovaiv — 
 dpviOcov 8pepp.aTa. 
 
 1 6. irapake'iiTopev — 0-vp.cpaiv^aei] 
 
 " But we pass over whatever 
 insignificant kind may have 
 escaped us, which may pos- 
 sibly be made to fit into one 
 of these, for instance, -the na- 
 ture of coins, seals, and stamps 
 of all sorts." [peya], which 
 Bocll. Vat. Ven. n omit, is re- 
 tained, not as genuine, but as 
 possibly preserving the trace 
 of a lost reading, perhaps of 
 P-6yis, suggested by Stallbaum. 
 
1252 
 
 HAATONOS 
 
 Animate 
 
 *ii mis, with 
 the excep- 
 tion of 
 sl:m s,\\i re 
 previously 
 
 i 1 1- ' 1 1 1< 1 ■ < I in 
 the art of 
 tending 
 herds. 
 There 
 remains 
 therefore 
 the class of 
 servants, 
 amongst 
 whom to 
 look for the 
 nearest 
 rivals of 
 the king. 
 But slaves, 
 who are 
 servants in 
 
 Tcov *|* [//eya] "|" Svvoltov dppoTTeiv, olov i) rov vofii- p. 28 
 (t/jlutos I8ea koll a([)payldoju koll ttolvtos x a P aKT VP ^- 
 yivos Te yap Iv avrois ravra ovftev e^ei ptya qvv- 
 vollov, aXXd tol piv els Koapov, tol 8e el? opyava 
 
 5 j3ia p.ev, opco? <5e irdvTtos eXKO/ieva avpojcouyaei. 
 tol Se 7T€pl tfiiodv ktyjctlv tcov r)p.lpcov, ttXt]V SovXcov, 
 ■>'] Trporepou uyeXaLorpo(j)LKr) Sia/jLepiaOe'io-a irdvTa c 
 eiXrjcpvia avcKpaiverai. 
 
 NE. 212. Yldvv p.lv ovv. 
 
 o SE. To Se 8r) 8ovXow koll iravrcov inrypeTcdu Xonrov, 
 Iv oh itov koll pavrevo/xaL rov? 7rep\ clvto to 7rXeyp.a 
 dpcpcafirjTOvi'Tcxs tco fiacnXeL Karoxpaveis yevrjaeaOaL, 
 KaOdirep toI$ vcpdvTOLLs tot€ tov? irep\ to vrjOew re 
 
 3. yevos — o-vp(paiVT)0~ei\ u For 
 these, while they have not in 
 them the nature of any exten- 
 sive kind which can be classed 
 along with them, yet can, by 
 hook or by crook, be made to 
 harmonize, though not without 
 some violence, either with the 
 ornaments or the instruments 
 of life." 
 
 re yap — aAXct] be and 
 even pevToi and dXka may 
 sometimes follow re, when the 
 opposition between two paral- 
 lel clauses is thought of as 
 the sentence proceeds, Cf. 
 
 Phasdo 63 C : irapa avbpas re — 
 on pevroi irapa deovs, where 
 however pev is interposed, and 
 
 Theeet. I43 C : irepl ahrov re rj 
 av Trepl rbv diroKpivopevov. The 
 
 two clauses here answer to py 
 
 peya and hvvarbv dpporreiv SUpr. 
 
 4. ds Kocrpov] Which is a de- 
 partment of iraiyviov '. 288 C. 
 
 5. /3t'a pev — opms 8e] Cf. 
 Eep. IO, 607 e: (3la pev, opws 
 
 Be dnexovTat, and Soph. Ant. 
 1 1 16 : o'ipoi pohis pev, KapBlas 
 B' eglaTapai to Bpav, re is used 
 because their not being refer- 
 rible to an important class is 
 one of the two reasons for 
 omitting them. 
 
 7. rj nporepov dyeXaiorpoCpiKr) 
 
 biapepiaGelaa ] Note the in- 
 verted order. 
 
 11. ev oh nov] " Somewhere 
 amongst whom." 
 
 rovs irepl avro to irXeypa] 
 He refers to the difficulty 
 about the king in the language 
 of the example of weaving r 
 i. e. those who dispute with the 
 king about the fabric of the 
 web itself and not only about 
 the instruments of the manu- 
 facture. Cf. 268, 281 ; and 
 vid. infr. 305 e : iravra gwv- 
 
 (paivovaav opdoraTa ttjv Br) 
 
 (3ao~i\iKr)v avpirXoKrjV. 
 
 1 3. toIs v(pdvrais\ Sc. dptfiio-- 
 ftrjTovvTas (paiveo-Qai. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 123 
 
 289. Kai ijalveiv kcll oaa aXXa eiTrop.zv. 01 <$' aXXoi ndv- 
 res, c6? dvvaiTLOi XeyOtvTes, d/xa reus- epyoi? to 19 vvv 
 d 8y prjOeicriv dvrjXcovTai Kai aTreywpLcrOi^aav diro /3a- 
 aiXiKrj? T€ kou TroXiTiKrjs 7rpd^eco9. 
 
 NE. 20. 'EoLKacn yovv. 5 
 
 SE. "Wl 8rj aKeyj/cofieOa tov? Xolttovs, irpoo-- 
 eXOovTe? iyyvOev, tv clvtovs 1 dftcofiev fiefiatoTepov. 
 
 NE. 20. Ovkovv xPV- 
 
 S*E. Tov? fiev Srj fieyiaTOVs VTrrjptTas, coy IvOivBe 
 iSeiv, TOvvavTLOV e)(0VTas evplaKO/jLev oh v7rco7TT€vaa- 10 
 fxev eTTLTrjbevfxa kou ttglOos. 
 
 NE. 20. Ttvas ; 
 
 SE. Tow wvttjtovs T€ Kai rco Tpo7ra> tovtco ktt]- 
 tovs' ov? avafjLCpio-firjTrjTcos SovXov? eypp.ev direlv, 
 e r\KiCFTa fiao-iXLKrjs pLCTairoLovpLevovs Teyvrjs. 15 
 
 NE. 20. ILSpc? otf; 
 
 37E. T/ 6Y; 7W iXevOepcov octol toIs vvv brj prj- 
 
 tli«- highest 
 
 degree, 
 have do- 
 thing in 
 common 
 with the 
 king. Nor 
 have thoBe 
 freemen 
 who en- 
 gage as 
 hirelings 
 in the ser- 
 vile opera- 
 tions of 
 trade. 
 
 9. fieyia-rovs — cos iv6kv8e tSeti/] 
 
 " The greatest — as seen from 
 where we now stand." I. e. 
 the greatest servants, because 
 most essentially such, this 
 being the only measure which 
 our method allows. Cf. infr. 
 303 c, for the same use of 
 (xeyio-Tos. Also Phileb. 45 a : 
 
 peyuTTai. tcov t)8ov£>v. Legg. I, 
 630 a : tov ? iv too fieyi(TTco 
 7To\epa> yiyvopevovs aplcrToxjs 
 
 8tc«pa.va>s. The contempt here 
 implied for dianovia may be 
 contrasted with a striking pas- 
 sage of the Laws, where the 
 power of ministering to them- 
 selves and others is made es- 
 sential to the officers of state, 
 
 6, 762 e : KaWa>Tri£ecr6ai XPV 
 
 too KaKcos 8ov\ev(rcu paXKov fj too 
 koXcos apgai. lb. 763 a : avrol 
 81 avriov 8iavorj8ijTcoarav cos j3tco- 
 aopevoi 8caKovovvres re Kai 8ia- 
 Kovovpevoi eavTols. 
 
 10. ok] = eKeivois a. Plural, 
 because of the two antecedents, 
 
 eTrLTT]8evpct icai iraOos. 
 
 1 1 . Ka\ TtaOos] " And feel- 
 ing," viz. ambition. 
 
 17. vols viiv 8f] prj6ei<riv ds 
 vnrjpeTiKrjv] Qu. an legend. 
 virqpea-iav 1 See, however, Eu- 
 thyphr. 13 d. " To the task of 
 ministering to those just now 
 mentioned" (the artificers of 
 the seven kinds of posses- 
 sions). All trade, especially 
 in money, is viewed by the 
 Greek philosophers as essenti- 
 
 R 2, 
 
124 
 
 nAATQNOS 
 
 0€l(TLU 6/9 VTT^piTLK^V (zKOVTtS OLVTOV9 TOLTTOVCTL, T« T€ ]>. 2* 
 
 yeoopyla? koll tu twv akkcov Teyvwv epya SiaKu/JLitpv- 
 T€$ eir ah\i)\ovs koll avi(rovi>T€?, ol p.ev kolt uyopa?, 
 ol Se ttoKlv 4k iroXeois aXXaTTOVTes Kara OaXarrav 
 5 koll Tre^rj, v6/ucrp.d re wpb? ruXXa koll olvto 7rpbs olvto 
 SLapLelfiovTes, ow dpyvpap.oi(3ov9 re koll ep.7ropov9 koll p. 29 
 
 VOLVKAl'lpOVS KOLL KOLTTqkoVS €7rOWOp.OLKOLp.ei>, p.U>V T7]9 
 
 ttoXltlkyjs dp.(j)Laj3r]Tr)crovaL tl ; 
 
 NE. 20. Tax' dv 'laws rr)s ye rcou epiropevTLKwv. 
 [o 3?E. 'AAA' 01; pjjv, ovs ye opcopev p.Lcr0o)Tov? koll 
 Orjras ttolo-lv eTOLpLOTOLTOL innqpeTOvvTOLS, prj TTore /3a- 
 ctlAlktJs p.eTo.7TOLOvp.evovs evpoypiev. 
 
 ally inferior to other forms of 
 industry. Cf. Rep. 2,371b: 
 Kai 8?) rail' ciXkav Siaxovuv 7rou 
 Ta>i> re elo~a£6vra>v Kai i^n^ovrmv 
 eKaara. ovtoi 8e elaiv 'dpnopoi. 
 lb. C : elalp oi tovto opavres 
 eavroiis iirl ttjv StaKOViai' rdr- 
 Tovai TavTrjv, iv pew rats 6p6a>s 
 otKovpevais noXecri a^ebov ti ol 
 ao~6eveo~TaTOL to. aapara Kai 
 uxpeloi Ti aXAo epyov irpdrTetv. — 
 avTrj apa rj XP eia KanijXcov Tqplv 
 yeve&iv e/x7roiet rfj noXet. rj ov 
 KaiT7]Xovs KaXovpev tovs irpbs 
 wvt]V re Kai irpao-iv diaKovovvras \ 
 
 and for ttoXiv in TrdXeco? in tbis 
 connexion, cf. Soph. 224 b, 
 and note. 
 
 The statesmen are viewed 
 as duiKovoi in the Gorgias, 
 p. 517. Cf. Theset. 175 e: 
 
 Topa>$ re Kai b£ews oiaKoveiv. 
 
 Legg. 8, 831 e (of the influ- 
 ence of commerce) : ipnopovs re 
 
 kuI vavKXrjpovs ko.1 diaKovovs irdv- 
 T(os rovs (pvaei Koapiovs twv av- 
 QpcoTTav tnrcpyafrpevr). 
 
 I. to. re — diapeifiovres ] 
 
 " Bringing over to each other 
 
 and equalizing the work of the 
 husbandman and of the other 
 artificers (eV aXX^Xou?, sc. rovs 
 yecopyovs, &c.) : some in the 
 market-place and some trans- 
 ferring them from city to city 
 by sea and land, exchanging 
 money for other commodities, 
 and these for money." 
 
 3. dvio-odvres] This seems 
 to point to a doctrine of ex- 
 change approaching to that of 
 Aristotle in Eth. Nic. V. 
 
 4. noXiv — dXXuTTOvTes] Cf. 
 Soph. 224 b, and note. The 
 words are usually taken to 
 mean " going from city to 
 city ; " for which cf. Theaet. 
 181 d : x^P av eK x®P as M era " 
 PdXXy. 
 
 9. rrjs ye to>v epiropevriKcov 
 (sc. iroXirtKTJs)] " The science 
 of directing commercial inter- 
 course." The merchant may 
 profess political economy, but 
 not statesmanship or political 
 science. 
 
 10. Kai drjTas] Cf. Euthyphr. 
 4 c. 
 
I10AITIK02. 
 
 125 
 
 1290. NE. 20. Ylco9 yap ; 
 
 aE. T7 <5e «jOa rotis* ra roiaSe SiaKovovvTas rjp.lv 
 eKacTTore ; 
 
 NE. 20. Ta 7rota eiVey /cat Ttvas ; 
 b S*E. 'O//' to K^pvKLKOV eOvos, hcroi re irep\ ypap,- 
 p.ara ao(j)di yiyvovTai ttoWvlkls vTryperyjaavTes; 
 koll 7roAA' arra erepa irepl rots apyas SiaTroveiaOai 
 tivzs erepoi 7rav8eivoi, t'l tovtovs av Aetjopcv ; 
 
 NE. 20. c 'Oirep eiTres vvv, vTrrjpera?, aAA' ovk av- 
 rov? iv tolls iroXecriv apypvTCLS. 
 
 HE. 'AAA' ov pjjv, olpai ye, evimviov iScov ehrov 
 
 TavTy Trrj (pavijcreaOai tovs 8ia(j)€p6vTa>? dp.<pLa(3t]- 
 
 TOvvTos Trjs iroXuTLKrjs. Kal tol (T<p68pa ye cltottov av 
 
 c elvai Soijeie to <j)reiv tovtovs iv virrjpeTiKr) poipa 
 
 TLVL. 
 
 NE. 20. KopuSfi ptv ovv. 
 
 iH'E. "Ert Srj 7rpoapLt^copev iyyvTepov kiri tov? 
 p.rpr(£> fiefiacravio-pevovs. elcri Se di re 7rep\ piavTiKrjv 
 e^ovTes twos e7ricTTr)pr/? SiaKovov popiov epp.7]vevTal 
 yap 7T0V vopifyvTai irapa 6ecov avdpumois. 
 
 Then th< ra 
 
 arc j .i 1 1 1 1 i ■ • 
 
 HCrV.'UltH, 
 
 -h.-li .1 ; 
 
 bi paid 
 
 a ad '-ribes, 
 
 who arc 
 
 not to be 
 5 confound- 
 ed with the 
 rulers. Yet, 
 however 
 strange the 
 thought 
 that the 
 claimants 
 for the art 
 of rule are 
 10 to be found 
 amongst 
 servants, 
 it was 
 no mere 
 dream. 
 There are 
 other pub- 
 lic minis- 
 ters -whom 
 ** we have 
 not yet 
 tried. 
 
 The priest, 
 who me- 
 diates be- 
 tween gods 
 and men, 
 and the 
 20 prophet, 
 who inter- 
 
 2. rovs — SiciKavovvTas] Sc. ev- 
 pcopev or Xe^opev. 
 
 5. irep\ ypappara ] E. g. the 
 public ypapparels at Athens. 
 
 6. o-o(po\ — vivr]p(TrjO-avTei\ Of. 
 Leg'g. 4, 720 b: e'dv re y eXev- 
 8epoi aaiv edv re 8ovXoi, kut eiri- 
 raf-iv be tbc beuTTOTUtv K.a\ decopiav 
 
 Ka\<arep.T;eipiavTr)VTexy r l VKT "> VTai - 
 
 7 . Kal 7roAA' arra — ndvbeivoij 
 
 " And certain others most 
 accomplished in performing 
 many other processes con- 
 nected with government." 
 
 9. "Oirep elnes\ Supr. vnrjpe- 
 Ti]<ravTas. 
 
 II. 'AAA' ov — pulparivi] "Yet 
 I am convinced it was no 
 mere dream which prompted 
 me to say that somewhere 
 hereabouts would appear the 
 men who above others put in 
 an opposing claim to the poli- 
 tical art — though it may in- 
 deed be thought very absurd 
 to look for these in any servile 
 department." 
 
 17. Trpocrpif-wpev eyyvrepov~\ 
 Cf. Thea?t. 179c: irpocrireov ovv 
 eyyvrepa. 
 
 19. twos — popiov] " A por- 
 tion of a kind of servile 
 
126 
 
 0AAT0N02 
 
 prets the 
 v, ill of hea- 
 
 Vl'll.llSSIIIIH' 
 
 ;ui impos- 
 ing atti- 
 tude. In 
 Egypt the 
 king must 
 always be 
 a priest, 
 and the 
 Arch on - 
 Basileus at 
 Athens 
 performs 
 the most 
 ancient 
 sacrifices. 
 At last, 
 then, we 
 have hit 
 upon a 
 trace of 
 those whom 
 we seek. 
 These 
 archon- 
 kings, 
 elected by 
 lot, belong 
 with their 
 ministers 
 to a certain 
 motley 
 and shift- 
 ing throng : 
 some of 
 
 NE. 20. Nat. p. 2 
 
 AE. Kat p.r)v Kcii to tcov lepecov av yevos, coy to 
 voptptov (prjcri, irapa p.ev rjp.cov dcopeds Oeols 8ia $v- 
 aicov €7ricTTrj/i6v Ictti /cara vovv e'/ceiWy Scopetadai, 
 5 7rapa Se tKelvcov rjplv ev^ctls ktyjctlv dyaOcov aiTTj- d 
 aacrOaL. Tama 8e Smkovov Te^yr)^ ecrTL irov p.6pia 
 aiKJyoTepa. 
 
 NE. 20. <&alv€Tai yovv. 
 
 A'E. ' H&7 to'lvvv pou 8oKovp.ev oiov ye tivos t)(vov? 
 ioi(j) b TropevopLeda 7rpoaairTea6aL. to yap 8rj tcov 
 lepecov o")(r}pLa /ecu to tcov fidvTecov ev p.aXa eppovr)- 
 pcaTOS 7rXr}povTac /ecu Soijav aepLvrjv XapcfidveL Sid to 
 p.eye6os tcov eyyeipr)p.aTcov, cocttc 7repl fiev KiyviTTOv 
 ovK e^ecTTi fiacriXea xcoph iepaTiKrjs dp\eiv, aXX' edv e 
 i^dpa /ecu Tvxfl irpoTepov itj aXXov yevovs (3iacrdp.evo?, 
 vaTepov dvayKalov ely tovto elo-TeXelcrOai avTov to 
 yevos. eri 8e kol tcov JD(Xr)vcov iroXXa^ov rcuy p,e- 
 yicTTaLS apyais Ta p.eyiaTa tcov nepl Ta ToiavTa 
 OvptaTa evpoi tls dv irpocTTaTTop.eva Oveiv. K.a\ 8rj 
 
 art," viz. of that of the inter- 
 preter, who is a species of 
 servant. 
 
 2 . if to vo/il/iov (fir/at] The 
 irony of this appears from 
 Legg. io, 906, Rep. 2, 364 e. 
 
 4. Kara vovv i<eivois ] Cf. 
 Soph. (Ed. Col. 1768 : Karh 
 vovv Kflva, where the expres- 
 sion conveys a similar reveren- 
 tial feeling. 
 
 9. oiov ye twos i'^vovs] Cf. 
 Rep. 4, 432 d : Kiv8vvevop.ev ti 
 
 €X elv iX v0S - 
 
 10. to yap — yevos] " For we 
 see that the priest and prophet 
 assume an attitude of proud 
 
 importance, and have im- 
 pressed mankind with awe, on 
 account of the greatness of 
 their undertakings, so that in 
 Egypt it is not lawful for a 
 king to reign without the 
 priesthood, but if it should so 
 happen that he has previously 
 forced his way to the throne 
 from some other caste, it is 
 necessary that he be after- 
 wards initiated into this." 
 
 18. to fieyio-ra 6vp.ara\ "The 
 
 most important sacrifices con- 
 nected with such things," viz. 
 with propitiation. Qu. an le- 
 gend. 6vp.arcov 1 
 
flOAITIKOS. 
 
 127 
 
 koll irap vfxlv ov% i]Ktara SrjXov o Xeyco' rw yap 
 XayovTi (3aaiXet (paai TrjSe tol cTepvorara kou p.d- 
 XiaTa Trarpia Tiov apyaiodv Ovctlcov dwodeducrOai. 
 
 NE. 213. Kou irdvv ye. 
 
 SE. Tovtovs re tolvvv tovs kXijpojtov? /3a<JiAeay 
 afia kcu iepeas, kou v7rT)pera? avrcou Kai riva erepou 
 irapiroXw byXov crKeirTeov, by dpn Kara8r]Xo? vvv 
 rjfiiv yeyovev diroywpLaOevTOiV tcov epirpocrOev. 
 
 NE. 212. Tlvas avrov? kou Xeyet? ; 
 
 JSJE. Kou p.aXa Tivds oltottovs. 
 
 NE. 212. T/ M) ; 
 
 aE. TlapfyvXov tl yevos avrcov ws ye dpri o~ko- 
 TTOvp-evcp (fxtiverai. iroXXoi peu ydp Xeovcri twv dv- 
 
 whoin, like 
 lions and 
 Centaurs, 
 
 are fierce 
 and strung; 
 others 
 weak ;ind 
 cunning, 
 
 5 likeSatyrs. 
 Yet their 
 strange- 
 ness is only 
 the igno- 
 rance of 
 an unfami- 
 liar vision. 
 The mon- 
 sters just 
 
 10 described 
 are no 
 other than 
 the band 
 who man- 
 age the 
 affairs of 
 states. 
 
 2. rfjoV] " Here in Athens." 
 Cf. the Rex Sacrificulus at 
 Rome. He might have in- 
 stanced Agamemnon in Ho- 
 mer and Theseus in Greek 
 tragedy. 
 
 to. aejxvoTaTa kcu paXicrTa 
 
 7rarpta] He presided at the 
 Lenaean or older Dionysia : 
 superintended the mysteries 
 and games called \ap7ra8r)(po- 
 piai, and had to offer up sacri- 
 fices and prayers in the Eleu- 
 siuium, both at Athens and 
 Eleusis. (Smith's Diet, of Ant., 
 s. v. Arch on.) 
 
 5. KXrjpaiTovs] Following up 
 the notion of Xaxovn. In men- 
 tioning the (ipxav ftacnXevs we 
 have at last hit upon one of 
 the real pretenders to political 
 power. 
 
 6. Kai virrjpiras avrmv] Cf. 
 Ar. Pol. IV. 1 2 : ebri 8e ovt)e 
 rovro 8iopio~ai pa.8iov, irotas del 
 KaKelp apxns' 7ToXXcoi> yap eVi- 
 uTarwv tj noXiTiKi) Koivavia Bel- 
 
 rat' dioirep iravTas ovre tovs 
 
 alperovs ovre tovs KXrjpaTovs 
 
 apxovras OeTtov, olov tovs iepeis 
 TrpwTov. 
 
 VTTrjpfTas avTav] The Xo- 
 
 yoypacpoi are perhaps included, 
 who furnished public speakers 
 with arguments. 
 
 9. Tivas — Kai] Cf. Thetet. 
 160 e : o ti BrjTTOTe Kai rvy- 
 
 Xavei ov. Euthyd. 27 1 a: '07ro- 
 
 Tepov Kai iparas, a> Kpircav ', 
 
 I 3. 7roXXoi — ffrjplois ] I. e. 
 
 " Some strong and fierce, some 
 weak and cunning." Compare 
 Bacon, Adv. of Learning, Ellis' 
 ed., p. 394. "And although 
 we have said that the use of 
 this doctrine (of Elenches) is 
 for redargution, yet it is mani- 
 fest the degenerate and cor- 
 rupt use is for caption and 
 contradiction : which passeth 
 for a great faculty, and no 
 doubt is of very great advant- 
 age : though the difference be 
 o-ood which was made between 
 
128 
 
 IIAATONOS 
 
 dpcoi^ zi^aai kol Y^evTavpois kui TOiovroiaiv (T€poi?, p 
 7rap.7roXAoL 8e ^.arvpois koll tois dcrOevecri kol 7roXv- h 
 Tpo7roi? Oif plots' rayv Se fieraXXuTTOvaL ra? re iSea? 
 kcu ti)v Suva/iiv eh dXXrjXov?. kol fievroi fioi uvu, 
 5 co 2co/c/j«re?, apri Sokco KaTavevorjKtvai tov? av- 
 Spas. 
 
 NE. 213. Aeyoi? av* eoiKa? yap arowov tl kolQ- 
 opav. 
 
 £E. Nat" to yap aroirov i£ ayvolas Tvacri avfi- 
 to (3aivei. K.a\ yap Srj Ka\ vuv avrbs tovto cnraOop' 
 itjatyvr)? rj/uL(fieyi>6r]o-a Kanbcov top 7rep\ ra tcoi> 7ro- 
 Xecov irpaypLara yppov. 
 
 NE. 20. lioiov ; e 
 
 SiE. TW iravTcov ra>i> o~o^>io~twv fieyiarov yoryra 
 
 orators and sophisters, that 
 the one is as the greyhound, 
 which hath the advantage in 
 the race, and the other as the 
 hare, which hath her advantage 
 in the turn, so as it is the 
 advantage to the weaker crea- 
 ture." And cf. Legg. 6, 781 
 
 a : to 8rj\v eTTU<\oira>Tepov 8id to 
 daBeues. 
 
 4. kcu jievToi av8pas] " And 
 
 come, I do think I now this 
 moment have perceived the na- 
 ture of the men." 
 
 7. eoiKcts — Kadopau] I. e. 
 " Judging from your looks." 
 Cf. Soph. Ant. 20 : S/7A01S ydp 
 ti Ka\x a L V0V0 ~' enos. Legg. 7> 
 
 8lO C : TL ffOTe T0VT G> £«Vf, 
 
 (paivet Trpbs aavTov ovtcos T]7T0pr]- 
 kcos \eyeiv ' } 
 
 The principle of election by 
 lot, which Plato ridicules here, 
 is admitted within very narrow 
 limits in the Laws. Cf. Legg. 
 
 3, 690 d : Qeocpikr) 8e ye Kcil 
 
 evcpikrj Tiva \eyovTes e/386pr]V cip- 
 
 xw (compare the seven forms 
 of government and seven ca- 
 tegories of possession in the 
 Politicus) els Kkrjpov Tiva irpo- 
 dyopev k.t.\. 
 
 9. to yap (itottov ££■ dyvoias] 
 
 Cf. Arist. Met. I. 2. 982 b: 6 8' 
 
 dwopcov kcu 6avp.d£a>v ot'erat dy- 
 voe'iv. 
 
 10. avros tovto enadov] " I 
 myself fell into this snare," 
 viz. of thinking sti-ange what 
 was only strange to me. The 
 Stranger is like the philoso- 
 pher as described in the Theas- 
 tetus, Avho knows nothing of 
 public assemblies or the de- 
 tails of civic life. For Trdo-x<o 
 in this sense, cf. Soph. 232 a, 
 Ar. Pol. IV. 7 • tovto ndcrxovo-iv 
 01 \eyovTes 8ia to pepTixdai KaKa>s. 
 
 11. e£al(pvr]s belongs by an 
 hyperbaton to KaTi8a>v. 
 
 14. Tov — yorjTa] Cf. Soph. 
 235 a : els yorjTa p.ev 8i] kcu p.i- 
 
00AITIK02. 
 
 129 
 
 91. KOLl TOLVTT}? Tt]S Te^UTJ^ epireipOTOLTOV OV U7T0 T03V 
 
 bvrm ovtcov ttoXltikwv kou fiaaiXiKCDv Ka'nvep iray- 
 yaXeTrov ovra a^atpeiv d(f)aipeT€OV } el p.eXXopev \8e1v 
 evapym to (jfTovpevov- 
 
 NE. 20. 'AAAa prjv tovto ye ovk avereov. 
 
 HE. Ovkovv 8rj Kara ye tijv e/.u/u. kul p.ot (f)pa£e 
 To8e. 
 
 NE. 20. To TToigv; 
 d HE. 'Ap ov povapyja twv ttoXltlkwv -qplv ap^cov 
 earl pla ; 
 
 NE. 20. Nat. 
 
 HE. Kou pera povapylav e'hroL tis av>, olpat, ttjv 
 virb tcov oXiycov dvvaareiau. 
 
 NE. 20. n«?<5' ov; 
 
 HE. Tplrov Se a)(rjpa 7roXiTeias ov\ rj rod nXr/- 
 6ovs apyr), SrjpoKpaTia rovvopa KXrjOelaa ; 
 
 NE. 20. lidvv ye. 
 
 HE. Tpel? 5' ovaai p.a>v ov irevre rpoirov tlvol 
 yiyvovTOLi, 8vo e£ eavrcov aXXa 7T/oo? avrcus bvbpara 
 tiktovo-cli ; 
 
 impostor of 
 impostors, 
 who must 
 be ■ pa- 
 rato a, how- 
 ever diffi- 
 cult the 
 task, from 
 
 i tlie true 
 Statesman 
 and King. 
 We com- 
 monly 
 speak of 
 three forms 
 of govern- 
 ment, mon- 
 archy, oli- 
 
 [ °garchy,and 
 democracy. 
 And the 
 distinctions 
 of compul- 
 sion and 
 freedom, 
 poverty 
 and wealth, 
 
 [£ . observance 
 of the laws 
 and law- 
 
 give rise to 
 the further 
 division 
 of mon- 
 archy into 
 royalty and 
 20 tyranny, 
 
 fiTjTrjv apa dereov riva. The sin- 
 gular after x°P ov is curious, but 
 this is only one more instance 
 of the transition from the class 
 to the ideal individual, which 
 we have had frequent occasion 
 to notice. 
 
 I. TavTrjs ttjs re)(yr)s epneipo- 
 rarov] Sc. ttjs aocpiariKris. Cf. 
 Gorg. 465 d : (pvpovrai iv rw 
 avrcp kuI irep\ ravra aocpajrai Ka\ 
 prjTopes, kol ovk e^ovcriv on XP1~ 
 o~a>vT<u ovre avrol eavrols ovre 01 
 a'AXoi (ivdpunroi tovtols. 
 
 5. 'AXXa firjv] " Well, we 
 must not relax our efforts in 
 
 regard to this." 
 
 tovto] Sc. to ivapyas I8e1v 
 
 TO £r]T0Vp.€V0V. 
 
 6. KaTa ye ttjv eprjv] Cf. SUpr. 
 
 277 a. 
 
 13. vnb t5>v oXiyoov] Depend- 
 ing on the verbal notion in 
 SwacrTeiav. Cf. Rep. 2, 359 a : 
 
 to biro tov vopov iniTaypa. 
 
 19. 8vo — TiKTovcrai] So the 
 three categories of the Sophist, 
 Being, Eest, and Motion, be- 
 came five through generating, 
 " by their own dialectic," the 
 categories of Sameness and 
 Difference. 
 
130 
 
 riAATONOS 
 
 and of oli- 
 garchy Into 
 aristocracy 
 and pluto- 
 cracy. 
 The Bame 
 distine- 
 tions do 
 doubt arise 
 in demo- 
 cracy, I'Ut 
 without 
 changing 
 the name. 
 Thus the 
 common 
 way of 
 thinking 
 recogiiizes 
 five forms. 
 But is any 
 one of these 
 based on a 
 real prin- 
 ciple ? 
 For we 
 have as- 
 sumed from 
 the first 
 that there 
 is a science 
 of govern- 
 ment. 
 
 NE. 20. Uola Srj ; p. 
 
 SE. 11/90? TO filaiOV 7T0V K(JU eKOVGLOV aTTOCTKO- G 
 TTOVVTtS VVV, Kol TieviaV KCli TrXoVTOV, KOL VOfJLOV KOLL 
 
 avofxlav, Iv aureus yiyvofxeva, 8nrXr)v eKarepav rolv 
 sSvolv diaipovvres p.ovapyiav fiev wpoaayopevovaiv a>? 
 Svo irapeyo\ievr\v eldi] 8vo?v bvopacn, TvpavviBt, to 8e 
 /3ao-i\iKj}. 
 
 NE. 20. 17 wit ; 
 
 S*E. Tr)v 8e virb oXlycov ye eKaaTOTe KparrjOelaav 
 iottoXlv dpicrTOKpaTia. kou oXiyapyla. 
 
 NE. 212. Kat irdvv ye. 
 
 HE. Arj/xoKpaTias ye jxrjv, lav r ovv ftiaico? lav 
 T6 eKovo-lco? tcov To.? ovcria? e\bvT(£>v to TrXrjQos p. 
 apxf), Koi lav re tovs vo/jlov? aKpiftcos (f)vXa.TTOv 
 1 5 lav re fir}, iravTcas Tovvo/xa ovdels avTrj? etcoOe 
 fieTaXXdrTeiv . 
 
 NE. 20. 'AAt?^. 
 
 HE. T/ ovv ; oiopLeOd Tiva tovtcov tcov TroXiTeicov 
 
 ^ ■ 
 
 29 
 
 3. vvv\ " According to pre- 
 sent notions." Cf. Soph. 236 a. 
 
 In Rep. 8, 9, we have the 
 picture of four imperfect states, 
 Timocracy, Oligarchy, Demo- 
 cracy, and Tyranny, nearly cor- 
 responding to the four "which 
 are distinguished from Kingly 
 Monarchy here. But the esti- 
 mate of each, and the mode in 
 which their relation to the 
 ideal government is conceived, 
 are very different in the two 
 passages. Plato is avowedly 
 speaking here according tp 
 the common opinion. The 
 acknowledgment that, after all, 
 democracy, under legal con- 
 ditions, is the least bad, is a 
 
 point of approximation to the 
 Laws. See the Introduction to 
 the Statesman. 
 
 tve.vi.av Ka\ -rikovTov\ Wealth 
 being the mark of the tyrant 
 and oligarch, as distinguished 
 from the king and the aristo- 
 crat, as well as from the 
 people. 
 
 6. Tvpavvidi, to 3e (Sacri\iKfj~\ 
 Cf. Soph. 221 e : v(v(ttikov fie- 
 povs, to Se Tre^ov TepvovTes (where 
 see note). Phsedo 105 e : 
 
 ' Apovaov, e<firj, to 8e adiKOv. to, 
 SC. e?8os. 
 
 IO. dp. Kal oXiy.] Sc. hiaipouatv. 
 
 15. avTrjs] Resuming drjpo- 
 Kparias, which is placed at the 
 beginning for emphasis. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 131 
 
 1*92. 6p6r)V dvai tovtoi? tois opoi? bpiaQeiaav, ivi kou 
 
 6\[yOl9 KOU 7To\\oiS) KOU irXoVTCO KOU TTtVia, KOU TCp 
 
 (3iaia) kou €KOV(ri(p, kou /x€Ta ypapparcov kou avev 
 vofJLGiv ^v/jL/3ali/ovaai> yiyveaOcu ; 
 
 • NE. 20. T7 yap 87) kou KcoXuei ; 5 
 
 b aE. ^k6tt€l 87) (jatyearepov, rfjde €7r6p.evos. 
 
 NE. 20. By ; 
 
 aE. T« prjdevTL Kara 7rpcoTas irorepov e/ifxevovpiei' 
 ?; dLa(poji>7]0'OfJLeu ; 
 
 NE. 20. Ta> 87) Tro'icp Xeyus ; 10 
 
 £7E. Trjv fioi(TL\LKr)v ap)(r)V tcdis liTLcnri\xoiv dva'i 
 nva etyapev, oipou. 
 
 NE. 20. No/. 
 
 SE. Kat tovtcov ye ol>x airaawv, dXXoc KpiriKrjv 
 8r)7rov tlvol kou €7riaraTLKrjP e/c tw akXoov 7rpoeiX6- 15 
 
 2. Tffl ftiaia Kal eKOvaico] Cf. 
 Arist. Pol. III. I : at eVi'as rS>v 
 7rd\iT€iS>v tco Kpareiv ovcras, aX\ 
 ov 81a to Ko'ivrj vvpcpepeiv. 
 
 3. Kai — ylyveadatj Plato re- 
 verts to the main construction 
 (here participial) instead of add- 
 ing another dependent clause. 
 
 The Words perci — ypappdroov — 
 
 ylyveo-Bai stand in apposition to 
 tovtois — 6pio~de7o~av. 
 
 pera ypappdrcov Kal avev vo- 
 pav\ Note the variety of ex- 
 pression. The laws are spoken 
 of with some contempt as 
 mere ypdppara, and are thus 
 compared to written rules of 
 art. Compare Phsedr. 258 a, 
 Gorg. 451 b : ol iv to> 8rjpm 
 avyypacpopevot. Legg. 9, 858 C : 
 ypdppara pev ttov ko.1 iv ypdupacri 
 \6yoi Kal aWcov dcrl noXXcov iv 
 
 rals TroXecrt yeypappevoi, ypdppara 
 de Kal to. tov vopadirov Kal Xdyot. 
 lb. 957 c. The expression is 
 often used also by Aristotle in 
 the Politics. 
 
 8. Kara nparas] A parallel 
 idiom to Kara povas. Kara as in 
 Kar dpxds. Some such word as 
 vnoOeo-iis may be here supplied. 
 
 II. to>v im.o~Trjpa>v eivai Tiva~\ 
 Supr. 258 b. 
 
 I4. KpiTlKTjV Tiva Kal iirio-TaTi- 
 
 ktjv] " One which is at once 
 critical and commanding." This 
 appears from 260 a, where, 
 however, KpiriKf], or rather yvw- 
 ariKrj, and ciutcuo-iky], are the 
 terms opposed. Compare supr. 
 275 c, Soph. 223 b, 224 d, 
 where there is a similar verbal 
 inexactness of reference. 
 
 S 2 
 
i m 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 But scien- 
 tific go- 
 vernment 
 is not se- 
 cured by 
 the rulers 
 being 
 many, few 
 or one, 
 rich or 
 poor, or by 
 their rule 
 being com- 
 pulsory or 
 voluntary. 
 We have 
 still, then, 
 to discover 
 under 
 which of 
 these forms 
 there is 
 contained 
 
 NE. 20. Nai. p. 
 
 SE. K(XK Tl]$ €7riCTTaTtKrj? T^f /J.€U eV d\j/vxoLS 
 
 epyois, Ti]v 8e iirl £wois". kcu Kara tovtov 5tt tov c 
 Tpoirov /lepl^ovre? 8evp del 7rpoeXi]Xv0a/iev, eirLaTrj- 
 5 /X77? ovk liTL\av6av6p.evoL, to $ rjri? ovx ikolvcos irco 
 8vvdpevoc SiaKpL^coaaaOaL. 
 
 NE. 20. Aeyeis 6 P 0m. 
 
 SE. Tout olvto tolvvv dp evvoovpev, oti tov opov 
 
 ovk oXiyovs oi>8e 7roXXovs, ov8e to eKovcnov ov8e to 
 
 10 aKOvaiou, ov8e ireviav ov8e ttXovtov ylyvecrOai irepl 
 
 amcov \pecov, dXXd Tiva e7Tio-Tr]prjv ; eiirep aKoXov- 
 
 dr]aop.ev toIs irpoadev ; 
 
 NE. 20. 'AAAce fJLTjv tovto ye d8vvctTOV /lit) d 
 iroLelv. 
 l 5 S?E. 'E£ dvdyKr)? 8rj vvv tovto ovtco aKeiTTeov, 
 iv tlvl 7TOT6 tovtcov eir LCFTr) /XT? £vp(3alveL yiyvecrdai 
 ire pi dvOptoirtov dpyrjs, crye8ov ttJ? x a ^ e7r&rrc "" 7 7 y KaL 
 fieyiCTT-qs KTrjaaaOai. 8et yap tdeiv avTr/v, tva 6ea- 
 crcop.e6a twos dcpaipeTeov diro tov (ppovl/xov fiacri- 
 
 2. ttjp pev ttjv Be] irpoetko- 
 
 fieda cannot be repeated here, 
 but some notion contained in 
 this verb, such as iOepeda, must 
 be supplied. 
 
 5. to <f t\tls\ Cf. Aesch. 
 Prom. 765 : ti d' ovtiv ; 
 
 8. rov opov'] " The distin- 
 guishing principle of the state." 
 Cf. supr. tovtols rots Spots. Rep. 
 8, 551 C : opos avrrjs (rjjy oAt- 
 yapxuts) olos eo~Tiv . Legg. 1,626 
 b : ov yap opov edov rrjs ev no\i- 
 revopevrjs woXeas. 
 
 II. avTav] Neut. 
 
 13. tovto ye] Sc. a.KOv\ov6e"iv 
 rots irpouQev. 
 
 16. ev tivi nore tovtcov] For 
 the irony of this, compare the 
 Search for Justice in the State, 
 Rep. 2, 368 e : "Io-<bs toLwv 
 
 like Lav av BiKaioo-vvr] iv tco peL£ovi 
 eveirj kcu paav narapadelv. lb. 
 
 373 e. ? 
 
 17. av6. apxqs, ttjs ^aXe7rwrd- 
 ttjs — KTTjo-aadai] There is a 
 strong emphasis on avBpatrav. 
 Cf. Theset. 174 d : Bvo-KoXaTepov 
 
 Be eneLvav £aov Kai eirifiovkoTepov 
 noipaLveiv Te Kai j3BaX\eiv vo- 
 
 pL£ei avrovs. See also Xen. 
 Cyrop. I. 1. 
 
 18. avTrjv] Sc. ttjv nep\ av. 
 apx- e7Tio-Tt]p7]v. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 m 
 
 92. AeW, o'l irpocnToiovvTai fxlv eivai 7toXitlkoI kul irei- 
 Oovctl iroXXov?, ela\ 8e ovda/jLco?. 
 
 NE. 212. Ae* yap 8rj iroiew tovto, a>s 6 Aoyoy 
 c rjfxii; TrpoeiprjKev. 
 
 HE. Mwf ow 5o/c€i TrXijOos ye ev iroXei ravTr/v < 
 t^ €7rio-Tr)fJLi]v bvvoTov eivai KT-qaaaOai ; 
 
 NE. 20. KcuTrcSy; 
 
 HE. 'AAA a^oa eV ^iXiavSpcp iroXei bvvarov e'/coc- 
 roz^ r^a? 7) /ecu TrevTrjKovTa avrr)v Ikclvws ktyj- 
 aacrdai ; 
 
 NE. 212. 'Paarr) pAvr av ovrco y elrj Traawv tcov 
 Teyycav' tdfiev yap otl ^lXlcov dvdpcov aKpot ireTTev- 
 ra\ roaovTOi irpbs rovs ev tols aXXois "YtXXrjaiv ovk 
 av yevoivro 7rore, pur) ri Sr) (3a(riXei? ye. Set yap Si) 
 tov ye rr)v fiacriXLKi]v eypvra eTTLarrjfxrjv, av r oipyrj 
 .93. K.a\ eav pirj, Kara, tov eparpoaOe Xoyov ofioos (3aai- 
 Xlkov TrpoaayopeveaQai. 
 
 HE. KaAeos" aTTepivrjfxouevcrag. eiro/xevov 8e olficu 
 tovtco rrjv fiev opOrjv dp\rjv irep\ eva tlvol Kal 8vo 
 
 il, harde 1 
 of .-ill ac 
 qui ition 
 the art of 
 governing 
 men, be- 
 fore we can 
 clear awaj 
 the rival 
 impostors 
 from the 
 true king. 
 The mul- 
 titude 
 cannot 
 have this 
 science. 
 ( Nor can 
 fifty in a 
 thousand 
 be found 
 possessed 
 of it. 
 
 The true 
 rulers, 
 then, if 
 more than 
 
 5. 7r\r)66s ye] " The people 
 at least." I. e. " Whoever else 
 has wisdom, do you think the 
 masses have it V Cf. Rep. 6, 
 
 494 a : (piXoaotpov pev lipa — 
 n^r/dos ahvvarov eivai. 
 
 13. too-ovtol] Sc. enaTov r) -nev- 
 TrjKovra. 
 
 irpos — •"EAAqo-ti'] " First-rate 
 as compared with those in 
 the rest of Greece." Even 
 these few are still judged, 
 therefore, by a relative stand- 
 ard. 
 
 14. pi] ti §77 — ye] Cf. Dem. 
 01. 2, § 23 : ovk evi 8' avrov 
 dpyovvra ovbe toIs (pi\ois irnraT- 
 reiv virep avrov ti iroielv, prjn ye 
 
 8r) toIs 6eo7s (PaSSOW, S. V. [Mr]). 
 
 Compare Rep. 2, 374 c : 7) ovroa 
 
 pqbiov ware a|ta. And for the 
 
 general tenour of this passage, 
 Rep. 4, 428, Cratyl. 389 a : 
 
 6 vopo&errjs, off 8r) tcov Srjpiovp- 
 ya>v cnravicoTaTOs ev avBpcoTTOLs 
 yiyverai. 
 
 1 6. Kara tov eprrpocrde \6yov] 
 
 Viz. 259 a. 
 
 18. eiropevov — tovtco] These 
 
 words are in apposition. 
 
 19. ttjv pev opdrjV cipxrjv] The 
 
 context shews that dpxn is used 
 here generally of all authority. 
 Cf. Rep. 1, 342 e : old' SWos 
 
 ovdus iv ovdepiq clpxij- 
 
 nepl eva tivci Ka\ Svo] Cf. 
 
134 
 
 FIAATQN02 
 
 one, must 
 
 verj few. 
 
 And u In - 
 thcr they 
 be rich or 
 I r, w ne- 
 ther their 
 subjects be 
 willing or 
 unwilling, 
 whether 
 they go- 
 vern with 
 or without 
 law, we 
 must es- 
 teem them 
 as such, so 
 long as 
 they rule 
 according 
 to the prin- 
 ciples of 
 their art, 
 
 koll iravTaixacriv oXiyovs del (j]T€W, orav opOrj yi- p. 2< 
 yvrjTai. 
 
 NE. 20. T/ ix-qv ; 
 
 3*E. Tovtov? Se ye, lav re Ikovtcov lav re clkov- 
 5 tcov apyoxriv, lav re Kara ypappcara lav re avev 
 ypappdrcov, kol lav 7tXovtovvt€? t) 7T€vop.evoi, vopu- 
 cttIov, (ocnrep vvv r)yovp.e0a, Kara rlyvrjv tjvtlvovv 
 dpXVv apyovras. tovs larpovs 5e ovy^ x]Kiaja vevopl- b 
 Ka/utev, lav re eKOvra? lav re atcovras rj/idg icovTai, 
 to Tepvovres rj Kaiovrts rj nva dXXrjv dXyrjdova 7rpocr- 
 dirrovTeSi koll lav Kara ypappoja r) yapis ypo.pp.d- 
 tcov, Kai lav 7revrjT€S k ovres r) ttXovctloi, iravTcas ovdev 
 tJttov larpovs (j)ap.ev, eaxrirep dv iTricrTarovvTes re^vr), 
 
 Phileb. 66 b : ire pi perpov Kai to 
 perpcov kol OTVoaa \P1 Toiavra 
 vopi^eiv rrjv atdiov rjpr]0-6ai (pvaLV. 
 
 6. TrXovTovvres f/ irevopevoi] 
 Cf. I Ale. 107 C : av re Treves dv 
 re irXovcrios rj 6 irapaivuiv ovhev 
 bioicreC ABrjvaiOLS orav — fiovkevwv- 
 rai irons dv vyiaivoiev, dWa forov- 
 o~iv larpbv eivai rbv avpftovXov. 
 
 vop-icrreov — cipxovras] dp^ovras 
 
 is to be taken twice in con- 
 struing. " They must be es- 
 teemed as rulers, whatever rule 
 it be which they conduct ac- 
 cording to art." 
 
 8. vevopUapev] The verb is 
 resumed in <pdpev below. Cf. 
 Soph. 230 C, d : vopi^ovres yap 
 3> iral — irXeico 8e p.rj, and note. 
 larpovs is to be repeated in 
 thought after vevopUapev : or the 
 verb is perhaps used absolutely, 
 as in vopl^eiv 6eovs. Cf. Rep. 5, 
 476 c, Gorg. 466 b. '■ And 
 physicians more especially we 
 allow to rank as such, whether 
 they heal us with or against 
 
 our will, by incision or cautery, 
 or by the application of any 
 other pain," (these words re'pvov- 
 res — irpoo-dirrovres are explana- 
 tory of aKovras,) "with or with- 
 out written precepts, in po- 
 verty or wealth, — in every case 
 we call them equally physi- 
 cians, so long as those who 
 minister preside according to 
 art over that to which they 
 minister, and preserve the same 
 by purging and reducing, or 
 by adding flesh, if only they 
 do this for the good of the 
 bodies which they make better 
 from being worse." (Perhaps 
 however the sentence was at 
 first intended to run vevopUa- 
 pev — cpdvai = " We are accus- 
 tomed — to speak," &c.) The 
 meaning is further perplexed 
 by the redundancy of dv povov in 
 the same construction as «oo-- 
 irep dv with aafao-iv. Compare 
 Kep. 7, 529 b : e'ym yap av — 
 pavddvrj. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 1 35 
 
 93. KaOalpovres e'/re d'XXto? \<jyyaivovTts ei're /cat av£jd- 
 vovres, dv fxovov eV dyaOco rep tcov acofidrcov, fieXTico 
 c TTOiOvvres e'/c yeipovcov, acotcocriv ol OepcnvevovTes e/ca- 
 croi ra Oepairevopeva. ravrrj Oijao/nev, cos olpai, kou 
 ovk aAAry, rovrov opov opOov elvai fiovov larpLKrj? koll 
 aXXijs rjcmvocrovv dp^rjs. 
 
 NE. 20. Ko/JLldfj fJL6V OUV. 
 
 JE?E. ' ' AvayKahv Sr) koll TroXireicov, cos eWe, rav- 
 tt]v 6pOr)v Siacpepovrcos eivai koll /xovtjv iroXirelav, eV 
 fj ns av evplcTKOi rovs apypvras dXrjOcos eirLarrjpovas 
 
 KOLL 01) doKOVVTCLS flOVOV, lav T€ KOLTOL VO/JLOVS lew T€ 
 
 oivev vo/jlcov apxcocri, kou eKovrcov kcu aKOvrcov, r) ire- 
 d vofxevoi 77 7rXovrovvres' rovrcov viroXoyicrriov ovSev 
 ovSaficos eivai Kar ovde/iLav opOorrjra. 
 NE. 20. KaAwc-. 
 
 SE. Kal lav re ye diroKrivvvvres rivas ?; koll 
 
 €K(3d/\AovT€? KaOaiptocTLV eV dyaOco rr)v woXlv, etre 
 
 Kal diroiKLas oiov crfirjmj [ieXlttcov iKirefxirovTes ttol 
 
 whatever 
 that art 
 
 may be. 
 Thai i< the 
 only true 
 
 Col] I I 
 
 trernment, 
 which lias 
 5 scientific 
 
 i-iil.r . 
 Ami as the 
 
 physician 
 
 is no less 
 esteemed, 
 whether he 
 heal us 
 will I or 
 without our 
 
 10 will and by 
 whatever 
 means ; so 
 the ruler 
 is no less 
 a ruler, 
 though his 
 subjects be 
 unwilling, 
 
 j- if he suc- 
 ceed in 
 preserving 
 them and 
 making 
 thembetter 
 men ; whe- 
 ther he 
 
 4. ravrrj ak\rf\ " This, and 
 
 no other, will be our decision, 
 that" — . 
 
 5. TOVTOV OpOV ] SC. TO 
 
 T *X"I1 Kat e>7r ' dyaOco ap\eiv 
 
 tS>v dpxofj-evcov. The doctrine 
 of this passage coincides with 
 Legg. 4 ; cf. esp. 712 e : as 5° 
 covofxaKapev vvv, ovk elcrl 7roAireZa<, 
 noXecov fie olKTjcreis hzo-iro(,op£vcov 
 Te kcu 8ov\evovo~cov ptpecriv eavTcov 
 tco-lv. lb. 713b: apxn re kcu 
 o'ikt]0~is — en\ Kpovov pa\' evdal- 
 pcov, tjs plprjpa e'xovad io~Tiv tJtis 
 tcov vvv apio-ra oi/ceirai. lb. 7*5 
 
 b. Compare the rejection of the 
 false pleasures in Phileb. 51 a, 
 tovtov — apx^ s ] This clause 
 is an explanatory resumption 
 
 of TCll/Ty. 
 
 9. Kal poviiv 7roAfreiaz>] "And 
 alone deserving of the name." 
 
 11. doKOvvras] I. e. eTncrTrj- 
 povas SoKovvras, like SeivorrjTes 
 8oKovo-aL in Theset. 176 d. 
 
 1 2. ko). — kcu] "Whether — or." 
 Note the variety of expres- 
 sion. 
 
 13. vno\oyio-T€ov~\ Cf. Rep. 
 I j 341 d : ovdev, olpai, tovto 
 v7ro\oyio~Teov, on Tr\ei iv ttj vrp, 
 oiK earl k\tjtcos vuvttjs' ov yap 
 Kara to irXeiv KV^fpvrjTrjs Ka\elrai 
 dXAa Kara, ttjv Te^vrjv Kal ttjv tcov 
 vavTcov dpxr)v. 
 
 16. dnoKTivvvvTes — e'/c/3aXXoi/- 
 Tis] Cf. Gorg. 468. 
 
 17. Kadalptoaiv] Cf. Legg. 5, 
 
 735, Rep. 7, 540 e. 
 
rae t 
 banish- 
 ment, 01 
 emigrati 
 or U 
 
 [36 riAATONOS 
 
 have re- apiKpoTepau 7T0lu)(Tlv, rj Tivas eTreicrayopevoi TroOev p. 
 
 aWovs eijooOev, ttoXitols TroiovvTes, amyv av^oicnv, 
 ecocnrep av eino-Tiiprj koll tco Sikollco Trpocr^pcopevot, 
 
 portation <Jco(j)VT€$, €K yelpovos fieATico 7roi<joai Kara 8uvap.iv, 
 
 of fresh / / \ \ \ / '/ ' ~ 
 
 Citizens. bTOLVTrjV TOT6 KCU KOTa TOVS TOLOVTOV9 OpOV$ rjpiV C 
 
 Socrates is pOVIJV 6p6l]V TTO\lT€LO.V elvai pT)TeOV. OCTOS 8e ciWaS 
 
 scandalized •» / > / > w v v \ r » \ % > 
 
 by the pro- AeyopeV, OV yvyCTLa? OVO OVTCO? OVO~aS A€KT€Ol>, fJLAAa 
 position / / ,\ \ « j / x / 
 
 that there pLtpiprjpeva? TCLVTrjV, a?. peV 039 eVVOpOVS Aeyoptev, 
 
 "^ g . eVt toc KaAAlco, tols 8e aAAay eiri ra altryiova pie- 
 
 3KS" »(wfa 
 
 law. He is 
 answered, 
 that al- 
 though le- 
 gislation 
 is certainly 
 a function 
 of the king, 
 yet the best 
 conceiv- 
 able go- 
 vernment 
 would be 
 the supre- 
 
 n f?y> not ^ avev vopcov dpxpvTcov dpOorrjTO? SieAOeip r)pas. 
 
 NE. 212. Ta pev aAAa, w iijeve, peTplco? eoiKev 
 elprjcrOai' to 8e kou avev vopcov 8eiv apyeiv yaAe- 
 7T(DTepoi> ciKOveiv ipprjOrj. 
 
 HE. 'Ep.iKpov ye e'(p07]s pe epoptevo?, d> ^EcaKpare?. 
 i^epeAAov yap ere SiepcoTrjcreiv ravra irorepov airo8eyei P- 29 
 wavTa, rf tl /cat ^ucr^epaiVei? to>v AeyOevToov' vvv he 
 rjSy (pavepbv otl tovto fiovArjaopeOa to irep\ ttj? tcov 
 
 1 . a-fiiKporepav Troiaxnv] This body politic, which is largely 
 
 answers to la-^vaivovTes above. applied in the Republic. The 
 
 3. eTvuTT^LTj Ka\ ro> 8iKaia>] notion of " the physician in- 
 
 Which in regard to politics creasing the body" is obviously 
 
 are the same. Cf. Theret. 150 suggested by the parallel of the 
 
 a : aXXct dia ttjv ciSikov re <a\ state. 
 
 anyyov ^vvayayrjv K.r.A. 12. to 8e — eppr]drj\ The formal 
 
 7. Xe'yo/nei/] Sc. iroXireias. courtesy of these words, like 
 
 9. eVi ra alo-xiova ] Cf. much else in this dialogue, ap- 
 
 Phileb. 40 c : r)8ovaL pep-iprj- proaches the style of the Laws. 
 
 pevai ras aKrjdels eVi ra yeXoi- 17 .j3ov\rj(T6pe8a — 8ie \6a.v rjpas] 
 
 oTepa. The first person being used for 
 
 peptprjo-dai ] There is a the second (cf. Theset. sub fin., 
 
 return from the participial to Kvovp.*v. Supr. 283 e : ap' av 
 
 the direct construction. In fiovkoip.e6a), the subject of /3ou- 
 
 the above sentences there is \r)o-6p.eda is not the same as 
 
 assumed the same analogy be- that of 8iik6eiv, hence the accus. 
 
 tween the individual and the rjpas. 
 
 state, the body natural and the rj)s — opdoTrjros] " The right- 
 
nOAITIKOI. 
 
 137 
 
 94> 
 
 NE. 20. Ylm yap ov ; 
 
 HE. Tf)07T01/ TLVOL fltVTOL ftr)\0V OTl TY)S (3a(TLAlKr)? 
 
 icrrii/ i) vofxoOtTiKiy to S' apiarov ov tovs vopovs 
 eariv io~)(V€ii>, aAA' avhpa rov pera (Ppoviyreois (3aai- 
 Xlkov. olaff onr} ; 5 
 
 NE. 212. Uf) 8y) Xlyeis ; 
 
 HE. 'On VOp.09 OVK OLU 7T0T€ hvVOLLTO TO T€ apiCTTOV 
 b KOLL TO SlKOLlOTOLTOV CLKplfitOS TTaCftV OLpGL TT6pihaficOV TO 
 
 fieXTLCTTOV iiriTaTTtiV ai yap avopoLOTiqTes twv re 
 
 l.iii oi B 
 
 will. The 
 reason La 
 
 fchat :i fi.\';<l 
 
 law can 
 
 never be 
 exactly 
 applicable 
 to the infi- 
 nite vrarit tj 
 and com 
 plexity of 
 human 
 affairs. 
 
 ness of rulers without laws." 
 I. e. How it can ever be right 
 to govern without laws'? 
 
 2. /xeVrot] "Certainly." Giv- 
 ing- assent to something which 
 qualifies the foregoing asser- 
 tion ; as in Soph. 245 b : aktj- 
 OevTara fievroi Xeyeis. Symp. 
 176 b : tovto pevTOi ev Xeyeis. 
 
 4. dXX' avbpa j3a(Ti\iKov] 
 
 " But the man who, having 
 wisdom, is capable of sovereign 
 rule." 
 
 5. 07177] Sc. cipio-Tov eariv. 
 
 7. "On] " Because." 
 "On popos ovk dp civvairo] Cf. 
 Arist. Pol. III. 10: 'Apx') 8" 
 
 eo~ri rrjs £r)T7]o~ea)s civtt], ivorepop 
 crvprpepei pdXXop vno tov apiarov 
 dvdpbs fiaariXevecrdai 7 V7t6 rap 
 dpicTTcop popoov. AoKei 8rj toLs 
 popi(ov(Tt crvpcpepeip &ao-i\evecr6ai 
 to KaOoXov povov 6 popos Xeyeip, 
 aXX 01/ npbs ra TrpoaTviTTTopTa 
 eTriraTTfip' cocrr e'p onoiqovv Tej(pr) 
 to Kara ypdppara dpxeiv rjXldiop. 
 Kai ep AlyinTTCp pera tj]p TeTpTj- 
 pepov KLPelp e£jeo~Ti to'ls larpols' 
 edp 8e tt pore pop, ejrl rc5 avTov 
 Kipdvpco. 'AXXd pi)p KaKelpop Set 
 vnapxet-p top Xoyop top KadoXnv 
 
 To'ls (ipXOV(TC KpflTTOP 8' (O prf 
 
 nporreaTi to nadrjTiKOP oXcos, »? co 
 avpcpve's. Tco pep ovp popco tovto 
 
 ov\ vnapxei, yf/vxrjP 5' dv6pooTTivrjp 
 avdyKt] tovt e'xetp nuaav. 'AAX' 
 icrcos up (pair) Tts <a? cipt\ tovtov 
 povXevcrerai nep\ tcop ko.6' eKaoTa 
 
 koXXiop. Aristotle concludes 
 that there must be a lawgiver 
 and laws : which, however, 
 must not be absolute where 
 they do not rightly apply. And 
 there must obviously be an au- 
 thority to determine cases not 
 provided for by the laws. 
 Should this authority be many, 
 few, or one 1 The many are 
 more difficult to corrupt — as 
 much water is less easily fouled 
 than little — but are less likely 
 to care for the preservation of 
 existing laws. One is better 
 than a few, because the few 
 are liable to division. See 
 Plat. Legg. 9, 875. 
 
 7. to re apiarop — iiriraTTetv] 
 
 The dative -nucnp depends 
 equally on TrepCXa$i»p and hrt- 
 TUTTeip. Having comprehended 
 exactly what is noblest and 
 most righteous for all, at once 
 to appoint what is best for all. 
 
 9. at yap dvopoioTrjTes rjvri- 
 povu] " For the dissimilarities 
 both of men and actions, and 
 what may be termed the abso- 
 lute unrest of human things, 
 
1 88 
 
 flAATQNOS 
 
 Law is like 
 a stupid 
 and wilful 
 man, who 
 insists at 
 all hazards, 
 in spite of 
 circum- 
 stances, on 
 obedience 
 to his com- 
 mands. 
 
 Whence 
 arises,then, 
 the neces- 
 sity of ma- 
 king laws ? 
 This is 
 shewn by 
 an ex- 
 ample. 
 
 avOpOHTGlV KOLL TCOU TTpa^OJV KOLL TO /JLT]8€7TOT€ /ni8ev, 
 
 ths eiros eiireiv, i)avyjav dyeii* tG>v dvOpomivaiV ov8ev 
 ewaiv airXovv eV ovdein nepl cnrdi'Tcou roll ewl iravra 
 tov yjpovov airo^aiueaOaL Teyyrjv ov$ tjvtivovv. ravra 
 5 8r) crvy)(OL>pov/jL€v ttov ; 
 
 NE. SO. TV wv ; 
 
 SE. Tov 8e ye vop.ov bptofiev o~ye8hv eir avTO 
 tovto ^vvTelvovTa, wcnrep tlvol avOpaarov av0d8r] /cat 
 d/uLa0r) Kca paqhiva pcr]8ev eu>vTa iroLtiv napa tt)v 
 io iavrov rd^ii>, parjo^ eirepcoTav fxr]8ei>a, 117)8' dv tl veov 
 dpa tco ijvpLfiaivri fieXnov irapd tov Xoyov ov avros 
 eireTa^ev. 
 
 NE. 20. 'AXr)6rj' 7tol€l yap areyycos, KaOdirep 
 elprjKas vvv, 6 vop.09 tj/jllv eKaaTOLs. 
 
 J 5 SE. OvKOVV d8vVCLT0V €V €)(eiP TTpOS TO. flT]8€7rOT€ 
 
 dirXd to 8ia ttolvtos yiyvofxevov airXovv ; 
 NE. 20. KivSvvevei. 
 HE. Aid tl 8r) 7tot ovv dvayKaiov vop.oOeTeLV, 
 
 i7T€l8r)7T€p OVK OpOoTdTOV 6 VOpLOS J dvevpeTeOV T0VT0V 
 20 T7]V CLLTLOLV. 
 
 NE. 20. Tiiirjv; 
 
 SE. OvKOVV KOLL Trap V/JLLV 6tCTl TLVES, 0I0LI KOLL €V 
 
 j». 2. 
 
 (join prfikv tcov dvOpuTrlvoov,) 
 
 suffer no art whatever to lay 
 down in any matter any simple 
 rule which shall be applicable 
 to all cases for all time." Cf. 
 Theset. 180 a. 
 
 7. in avrb tovto] Sc. to 
 cnrkovv ti a.Tro(j)r]vao~8ai irepi dndv- 
 twv Km eVt TtavTO. tov xpovov. 
 
 eV ciiito tovto f-WTelvovTa\ 
 
 " Bending all his energies to 
 this." 
 
 8. wanep k.t.X.] E. g. the 
 
 Creon of Sophocles. Cf. Antig. 
 
 705-7 «3- 
 
 IO. firjKavTi — iirira^v] "Not 
 even if some fresh thing, differ- 
 ent from the terms of his en- 
 actment, should happen to be 
 better for some individual." 
 For a-v^aivr] @e\Tiov, cf. infr. 
 295 C '. arvp(3aiv6vTcov ciXXcov j3eX- 
 
 TIOVCOV TOIS KlijXVOVCTlV. 
 
 16. 8td ffavTos;] Sc. tov \p6vov. 
 
 2 2. Ovkovv Kai -trap vp.1v] This 
 
 is one of the places where we 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 139 
 
 94. dXXais TroXtaiv, dOpocdv dvOpMiroov daiojaei?, €M"€ 
 7rpos Spofxov etre TTpos dXXo tl, (jjiXoveiKias eueKa ; 
 
 NE. 20. Kai irdvv ye ttoXXolL 
 
 AE. <&€pe vvv dvaXd(3co/jL€i> irdXiv p.vqpir) rots tcov 
 re X^t7 yvpLvafyvTCdv €7r travels eV rai? roiavrais dp- 
 
 NE. 20. To Trow// ; 
 
 S*E. 'Or* XeirTovpyeiv ouk ey^copelv rjyovvTou ko.0' 
 
 e ej/<x e/caaTOf, to) crco/jiaTL to irpoarjKOv eKaaTcp irpoa- 
 
 TaTTOvTes; dXXci Tra)(VTepov oLovtcu Seiv cos eVt ro 
 
 Ee who 
 trains men 
 for athletic 
 contest i 
 doea not 
 adapt hie 
 
 each indi- 
 vidual CUSI-, 
 (that would 
 bo impos- 
 sible,) but 
 is con- 
 tented with 
 prescribing 
 general 
 rules. 
 
 miss the dramatic liveliness of 
 Plato's earlier style. The scene 
 of these dialogues is a palaestra. 
 But this can hardly have been 
 pi'esent to the author's mind 
 when these words were written. 
 Unless the Stranger is sup- 
 posed, like the philosophers in 
 the Thesetetus, to be wholly 
 ignorant of what is going on 
 around him. 
 
 I. ddpocov — c5o"K?'^o"et?l Cf. 
 Legg. 12, 942 c: ddpoov dc-l Kai 
 a/ia Kai koivov tov fiiov o tl jud- 
 Xto-ra ndai ndvTcov ylyvs<r6ai. 
 
 aavcijo-eis] The abstract word 
 is used, as supr. 264 b : rida- 
 creiais tcov Ixdvcov — }(r]vo(BooTias 
 — yepavoficoTias. 
 
 4. dva\dj3cop.(v — p.vj]p.rj\ Cf. 
 
 Phileb. 34 b. 
 
 5. appals] The word is used 
 in the most general sense. Cf. 
 Rep. I, 345 e : ev re iro\niKr\ 
 Kai IBitoTiKrj dpxj]. lb. 343 d : 
 7rd(rav dp)(r]v } Kad' oaov dpxt]. 
 And for the plur., cf. Prot. 
 
 354 b : acoTTjpiai Kai ciXXcov dpxai 
 
 Supr. 293 c, alib. 
 
 7. T6 7roIoz> ;] " In what re- 
 spect ?" 
 
 8. XeTTTovpyetv] "To work in 
 
 minute detail." The word is 
 used above, 262 b, of dividing 
 too minutely at the beginning 
 of an inquiry. The only other 
 passage where the word oc- 
 curs in classical Greek is Eur. 
 Hippol. 923, where it is ap- 
 plied to subtlety in discourse. 
 Another coincidence between 
 the language of these dia- 
 logues and that of the trage- 
 dians. 
 
 10. TTaxvrepov\ Opposed to 
 \eiTTovpya.v. " In larger masses. 
 More in the gross." Cf. supr. 
 277 a-c. Contrast Aristotle's 
 view, that the work of the 
 gymnast and physician regards 
 the individual — fxdWov 8' "icrcos 
 ttjv rovoe, Ka6' eKaarov yap la- 
 Tpevei. Eth. Nic. I. 4. 
 
 naxvTepov — cos eVt to 7roXu] 
 We find an echo of these words 
 in the language of Aristotle, 
 
 Eth. Nic. I. I : dyanr^Tov ovv 
 irepl toiovtcov Kai €K toiovtcov Xe- 
 yovTas naxvXcos Kai tvtvco Ta\r]6es 
 ivhe'iKWO-Qai, Ka\ nc-pl tcov cos eirl 
 to no\v Kai 4k toiovtcov Xe- 
 yovTas ToiaiiTa ml 0-vp.nc-paive- 
 adai. 
 
140 
 
 nAATQNOS 
 
 So the law- 
 giver,being 
 unable to 
 provide for 
 ever}' case, 
 enactswhat 
 is generally 
 for the 
 best. 
 
 He who 
 could pro- 
 vide for 
 every case, 
 could do 
 so, while 
 present, 
 
 7ToAv KflL CTTl 7T()AA0V<> Tl]l> TOV AvCTlTeAoVVTOS TOIS p. :< y 
 
 crco/iaai iroielaOai ra^w. 
 
 NE. 20. KaAm. 
 
 SE. Aib Si] ye Kal laovs irovovs vvv fiiSovres 
 
 5 6.6 pool's dfia fiev etjopficoaiv, a/xa de Kal Karairavovai 
 
 Spofxov leal 7raAr)? Kal iravTcov tcov Kara ra acopiaTa 
 
 TTOVCOV. 
 
 NE. 2Q. "Eari radra. 
 
 HE. Kat tou vopoOeTrjv rolvvv rjyco/jieda, rov rai- 
 \ocriv ayeAais erriaTaTrjaovTa rov SiKaiov irepi Kal tcov 
 7rpb? dAArjAovs ^vp,(3oAalcov, firj 7ro#' Ikclvov yevr\- p. 2<^ 
 o~eo~6ai rrdaiv dOpoois TrpoararTovTa aKpificos evl 
 eKacrrco to 7rpoarjKOv dirobiBovai. 
 NE. 20. To yovv cikos. 
 15 aE. 'AAAa to tois 7roAAols ye, olfiai, Kal cos €7rl 
 TO 7T0\v Kal 7TC0S OVTCOCTl ira^vTepcos eKacrTois top 
 vbpov Orjaei, Kal iv ypdpp.acrtv onrodiSov? Kal ev 
 dypa/j-paTois, iraTpiois Se eOecri vopcodeTcov. 
 NE. 20. *Op6m. 
 20 HE. *Opdm fievToi. ttcos ydp av T19 'iKavbs ye- 
 voit dv 7T0T€, co ^coKpaTes, coo~Te Sia (3iov del Trapa- 
 KaOrjpcevo? eKacrTcp Si aKpifieias irpoaTaTTeiv to irpoa- b 
 rJKOv ; eirel tovt av SvvaTO? cbv, cos oipiai, tcov ttjv 
 
 1. rrjv — ra|jz/] "To pre- 
 scribe what is profitable for the 
 body." 
 
 4. vvv] " As the matter 
 stands." Cf. supr. 291 e. 
 
 9. Tai<Tiv dyehais] The Ionic 
 
 form of the dat. plur. occurs 
 four times in this dialogue 
 (supr. 2 6 1 e, BmXacrioio-i : 291a, 
 toiovtoktiv : infr. 304 e, irro/jLe- 
 voktlv), and often in the Timaeus 
 and Laws. 
 
 12. nacriv] The dative de- 
 pends partly on inavov and 
 partly on TrpocrraTrovTa dirodi- 
 dovac. 
 
 15. to rots ttoXXois ye] Sc. 
 TrpQcrrfKuv. 
 
 16. eKaaroLs] " To each na- 
 tion." 
 
 17. d-n-odibovs] "Exhibiting; 
 prescribing." Cf. supr. dnodi- 
 86vai. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 141 
 
 95. (3aaiXiKr]v octtictovv ovtco? 67ri(TTiipr)v (lXtjc/wtcov , 
 a)(oXrj 7ror' av eavTco Oeir ip.7ro$Lap.aTa ypacpcov 
 tovs XeyOevTas tovtov? vop.ov?. 
 
 NE. 20. 'E/c tcov vvv youv, co ije've, eiprjp,evcov. 
 
 HE. MaXXov 8e ye, co (3eXTicrTe, £k tcov peXXov- 1 
 tcov prjOrjcrecrOai. 
 
 NE. 20. Tlucop 8r) ; 
 
 S?E. Tcoy Tcucovde. ehrcop.ev yap 8r) Trpo? ye rj/ias 
 c olvtovs larpov fieXXovTa rj koli Tiva yupLvacrTtKov dwo- 
 8-qp.eiv kou direaeaOaL tcov 6epa7revop.evcov avyvov, coy 
 oloito, yjpovov, firj pLvyp-ovevaeiv olrjOevra ra irpoara- 
 \6evTa tov9 yvpLvafypcevovs rj tovs Kap.vovTa?, vtto- 
 pLvrjpcaTa ypacpeiv av eQeXeiv avTols, 77 ttcos ; 
 
 NE. 20. OtW. 
 
 HE. T/ Se ; €i 7ra/)a do^av eXaTTco -%p6vov diro- 
 
 fypLrjaas eXOoi TrdXiv, dp ovk av Trap eKelva rd 
 
 ypdfipara ToXpar/aetev aXXa VTroOecrOai, $jvp.(3aivov- 
 
 d tcov aXXcov fieXriovcov tols KapLvovcn Sid Trvev/xara rj 
 
 ti Ka\ dXXo ivapd rrjv eXTrida tcov e/c Atoy eWepcos 
 
 by word 
 of tnoul li, 
 and would 
 
 hamper 
 
 liiiu elf 
 with writ- 
 ten laws. 
 
 But if such 
 an one were 
 going into 
 
 a far coun- 
 try, he 
 would pre- 
 scribe, like 
 
 a wise phy- 
 sician, what 
 on the 
 1 whole was 
 likely to be 
 for the best. 
 Yet, should 
 the physi- 
 cian come 
 back sooner 
 than he 
 expected, 
 would he 
 not venture 
 to contra- 
 vene his 
 own ordi- 
 nance, if 
 some un- 
 expected 
 change of 
 
 3. tovs Xf^^eVras tovtovs vo- 
 ixovs] Cf. infr. 299 c : els 817 
 ti 8iKaa-Tfjpi.ov, where there is 
 the same distant way of 
 speaking of what is familiarly 
 known. 
 
 8. e'lirapev — larpov k.t.A.] Cf. 
 Rep. 6, 488 : vor](Tcopev — vaxi- 
 
 Kk-qpov k.t.X. Theset. 159 b: 
 
 Xeycopev 8f] epe re Kai ere k.t.X. 
 
 " Let us put to ourselves the 
 case of a physician, &c." 
 
 9. dnoSrjpdv] The passage 
 recals the expression of Scrip- 
 ture : " Going into a far coun- 
 try." The case of Solon is 
 probably in Plato's mind. 
 
 10. at o'Iolto] The optative 
 
 is similarly used in putting a 
 supposed case, Rep. 2, 360 b : 
 uv8e\s av yevoiTO, a>s 86£eiev, ov- 
 tcos aftapdvTivos. 
 
 13. e'8e\eiv~\ Governed by 
 eiTmfiev, which must be repeated 
 in thought. 
 
 15. Tide; ei] Bodl. ti 81j. 
 
 1 6. nap' eKelva — inro6eo-6ai] 
 
 " To suggest other things not 
 contemplated in his former 
 prescriptions." 
 
 18. 81a. nvevpara yevopeva] 
 
 " On account of winds or other 
 heavenly influences which have 
 come unexpectedly out of the 
 usual course." Note the alter- 
 nation of words. 
 
142 
 
 IIAATQNOS 
 
 different 
 
 course ex- 
 pedient for 
 
 tients ? 
 
 And were 
 the law- 
 giver, or 
 another 
 like him, 
 to come 
 again on 
 earth, shall 
 he not be 
 
 7Tu>9 Twv €iu)06tu)U ytvofieva, Kaprepcov 8' av r/yoho 
 8dv pu) €K(3aiveiv rd uphold 7TOT€ voptoOeryOevTa prjTe 
 avrbv TrpoerTCLTTOvTa dXXa fxr/re rbv Kupvovra crept* 
 roXficovTa irapd tcl ypa(f)evra 8pav, <w? tolvtol ovra 
 5 larpiKa koll vyietvd, rd 8e irepcos yiyvoptva vocrcoSij 
 re koll ovk evre^ya ; i] ttolv to tolovtov kv ye erri- 
 ar-qprj tjvpLfiouvov koll dXrjOel Teyyr) Trepl diravra 
 TravTOLTracn yeXcos dv 6 /leyiaTOS ylyvoiro tQ>v tolov- 
 
 TCOV VOpLO0€T7] flOLTOdV \ 
 
 io NE. 20. YlavTairacri p.ev ovv. 
 
 SE. Ta> 8e rd 8lkcllol 8r] koll dSiKa koll KaXd koll 
 ai(T)(pd koll dyaOd koll KaKa ypdyjfavTi koll aypaipa 
 vopLoOerr/o-CLVTi toll? rcov dv0pa>7rcov dyeXais, biroaaL 
 Kara ttoXlv ev eKacrTais vopLevovrm Kara tovs tcov 
 
 isypatyavTcov vopLovs, dv 6 /xerd Teyyqs ypdyjsa? rj 
 
 1. Kaprepmv — vop.o8eTt]p.aTa>v ;] 
 " But would think it right, 
 both for himself and the sick 
 man, stubbornly to avoid trans- 
 gressing the ancient laws once 
 given, he giving no new com- 
 mandment, and his patient not 
 daring to do otherwise than 
 was prescribed, accounting this 
 the medicinal and wholesome 
 course, any deviation from 
 which is inartistic and un- 
 wholesome : or would every 
 such proceeding in the case of 
 a science or genuine art, in 
 any circumstances involve such 
 lawgiving in the most utter 
 ridicule V 
 
 2. rot dpxaia vopodeTrjdevra] 
 
 I. e. tci air apxfjs vop.. The par- 
 ticiple, as in Soph. Trach. i : 
 
 apxaios (Pavels. 
 
 6. rj nav to toiovtov — T*X v Il\ 
 
 What is at first expressed ge- 
 
 nerally in the nominative is 
 resumed in the genitive in a 
 more particular form, by a 
 change of construction like 
 that in Horn. II. Z. 510 : 6 §' 
 
 dy\a'irj(pi nenoidcos plp(pa e yovva 
 
 <pepei. Phsedr. 229 e. Cf. Rep, 
 4,^434 a, 7, 521 a, Legg.^ 6, 
 
 75lb: rov — apxat dveTnrrjdeLnvs 
 67rio"r7jcra(. — ye Acos av 7rdp.rro\vs 
 £vpfiaivoi. Phsedo 6g c, Lach. 
 185 a, Xen. Mem. I. 2. 
 
 7. dXrjdel rexvy] True art, 
 either as opposed to ip,ireipia, 
 mere practice, which pretends 
 to the name of art, or as op- 
 posed to the profession with- 
 out the reality of art. 
 
 7rept dnavTa belongs to £vp- 
 ftaivov, TvavraTTao-L to ylyvoiro. 
 
 14. vopevovrat.] "Are herded," 
 but with a play on v6jxo<:. Cf. 
 Legg. 4, 714 a: rrjv rov vov 8ia- 
 vnp.rjv eirovopd^ovTCi vopov. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 143 
 
 95 
 96, 
 
 TLS €T€p09 O/J.OIO? d(f)LKt]Tat, pi) i^&TTtO 8r) IMpd TUVTU 
 
 erepa irpoaTaTTUV ; ?; koll tovto to drroppypa ovSev 
 iyTTOV av €K€ii>ov rfj aXrjOda yeXolov (paivoiTO ; 
 
 NE.20. Tlfl^l 
 
 SE. OlaO' ovv im rw tolovtco Xoyov tov irapa 
 rcoi> iroXXwv Xeyopevov ; 
 
 NE. 20. Ovk ivvoco vvv y ovrco?. 
 
 HE. Kat /u?)z/ ev7rp€7rrj9. (fiaal yap 8i) Self, el T19 
 yiyvooo-Kei irapd tovs twv epLirpocrOev (oeXriovs vopovs, 
 vop.oOe.Teiv tt)v iavrov ttoXlv eKaaTOv TreicravTa, aAAcoy 
 hep.1). 
 
 NE. 20. T/ ow ; ou/c SpOco? ; 
 
 SE. 'Io"ws'. a^ 5' ow /x?) 7T6i8g)v tis $La{r)Tai to 
 
 fieXTLOV, aTTOKpLVOU, TL TOVVOpa TYjS (3la? carat ; Mr) 
 
 pAvTOi ttco, irep\ 8e tcov epnrpocrOev irpoTepov. 
 NE. 20. Yloiov 8r) Xeyeis ; 
 
 permitted 
 to change 
 
 his "\\ 11 
 
 appoint- 
 
 IllOIlt '. 
 
 The cur- 
 rent saying 
 is specious 
 enough : 
 "Let a man 
 win over 
 his state 
 to accept 
 
 10 new laws, 
 and then 
 let him im- 
 pose them." 
 But sup- 
 pose lie 
 force them 
 on her ac- 
 ceptance, 
 what shall 
 
 1 5 be said ? 
 
 1. tis erepos opoios] I. e. A 
 
 new lawgiver. Compare Legg. 
 
 II, 926 C : r) prjv irupovra <al 
 
 £(OVTO. aVTOV TOV VOpodeTr/V prjTTOT 
 
 av avayKaaai Trpdrreiv ovtui. 
 
 prj egeo-ro) 8rj] " Must he 
 really not be permitted ?" Cf. 
 Rep. I, 357 • H-V diroKplvcopai ; 
 Legg. 7? 800 e : eiravepaTco — el 
 — tov6' fjp.lv — KeicrOco. lb. 6, 7 1 9 
 
 e : norepov pr/8ev Trpocrayo- 
 
 pevrj — dXXa — TptTTTjTai j — e^earai 
 
 corr. F. 
 
 2. rj — (paivoiTO ;] " Or would 
 this prohibition not seem in 
 reality to the full as ridiculous 
 as the former one V 
 
 8. (pacrl yap 8rj Sell/] Cf. 
 
 Legg. 784 c. Pseudo-Zaleuc. 
 ap. Stob. (Mullach. p. 543 b): 
 
 'Eav 8e tis ftovXr/Tai tu>v Keipeveov 
 vdpcov Kivtlv rj d"Wov elo~<pepeiv 
 
 vopov, els fipoxov e'lpas tov rpd- 
 XrjXov Xeyerco rols noWols nepl 
 avTov' Kai edv pev y\rrj(pi£opeva>v 
 86^rj \eKvcr8at tov vopov r) imdp- 
 X ei v tov elo~(pepopevov, /cat avTov 
 d8a>ov elvai' edv 8e 5 TTpoxnrdpxcov 
 pdXKov 8okj) KaXcos e\etv rj 6 elo~- 
 (pepopevos, r) ci8ikos, redvdvai tov 
 Kivovvra f) elacptpovTa vopov, em- 
 o~nao~8evTos tov /3/jo^ov. 
 
 9. tcov epwpoo-8ev~\ Of the 
 
 men of former time. 
 
 10. vopodeTelv — pr{\ "That he 
 should legislate when he has 
 persuaded his own state, but 
 not otherwise." 
 
 I 5- n"ep V ' 8e Tcov epirpoo-6ev irpo- 
 
 Tepov\ " But answer me first 
 with regard to our previous 
 instances, i. e. the physician, 
 &c." 
 
144 
 
 nAATQNOS 
 
 it' a |.ii\ i- 
 
 oian forced 
 a patient 
 
 to '1" <'"ll- 
 
 trary to 
 
 lion, and 
 the treat- 
 ment so 
 Forced were 
 bi -i. would 
 ii be called 
 iinw bole- 
 some treat- 
 
 N ,, more 
 should the 
 proceeding 
 
 of one who 
 forces a 
 state to do 
 a great 
 right con- 
 trary to the 
 laws be 
 called un- 
 righteous. 
 Nor does it 
 make any 
 
 HE. "Aj> ti? apa fxr) TrtiOow tov laTpevo/ievois, p, iy 
 t\tov Se 6p0a>? T))i> Te^pi^u, irapd to. yeypa/xpcei/a /3eA- 
 TLOV avayKaijj 8pav irulba rj tlvu. avbpa ?; koll 
 yvvaiKa, tl Tovvofia r>;? /3/a? karat tolvti]? ; dp ov 
 lirdv p.dX\ov i) to irapd ti)i> rt\vr)v Xtyofievov dp.dp- 
 Ti]p.u to vocrcodes ; kcu irdvra opOcos ehruv eari c 
 TrpoTepov tw /3iaa0eWt irep\ to tolovtov ttXi^v otl 
 foacoSi] kcu dreyva niirovOev viro twv fitacrapAvoiV 
 IcLTpwv ; 
 io NE. 20. ' ' AXrjOecrTOLTa Xeyeis. 
 
 HE. T7 8e rifiiv 8r) to Trapa rr)v ttoXltlki-jv reyyr)v 
 dpdpTrjjxa Xeyop.evov Igtlv ; dp ov to alcryjpov koll 
 KaKOU koll clSlkov ; 
 
 NE. 20. YlavraTTaai ye. 
 iB HE. Tcov 8rj ^Laa6evTu>v irapd ra yeypafi/iei^a 
 
 I. "Av tis tipa firj nci6a>v tov 
 uiTpevofieuov] Cf. Legg. 3,684 c: 
 Kal prjv rovro yt 01 7roXAot ivpoa- 
 TaTTovcri rots vopoBerais, 07rws 
 
 TOIOVTOVS 6l'](T0V0~L TOVS VOflOVS OVS 
 
 enovres 01 dtjpoi koi ra nXr)6rj S«- 
 £ovrai, KaBairep av e'i Tt? yvfxva- 
 o-rals rj tarpols TvpoaraTTOt p,e8' 
 r)8ovr)s Btpanevtiv re Kal Idadat ra 
 6epaTrev6p.€va aapara. 
 
 apa] " According to the 
 theory we are considering." 
 
 5. irav — voawSes] "Anything 
 rather than the error which is 
 spoken of as a violation of the 
 art, namely unwholesome treat- 
 ment." 
 
 6. Kal irdvra — larpmv] " And 
 
 the man who has been com- 
 pelled in such a case has a 
 right to say anything sooner 
 than that he has suffered un- 
 wholesome and unscientific 
 treatment from the physicians 
 
 who compelled him." 
 
 j 1 . Ti Se — eo-nv] " But what 
 is the error which is named as 
 a violation of the political 
 art?" 
 
 15. Tffli/ 8rj j3ia(rap,eva>v~\ A 
 
 redundant and irregular sen- 
 tence. The first genitive is 
 resumed in rwv toiovtoov go- 
 verned by ■v/z-oyov, which is an 
 accusative without an explicit 
 construction, but governed by 
 dire implied in <pepe. The words 
 
 p.eXXei, KarayeXao-roTaTos, avrm, in 
 
 what follows, are to be referred 
 to \j/6yov, which the pronoun 
 avTa> resumes in a more definite 
 construction. " Now in the 
 case of those who are compelled 
 to do contrary to written and 
 hereditary laws, other things 
 more just and better and no- 
 bler than their former doings, 
 say again of the exclaimcr of 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 145 
 
 296. /cat irarpta Spdv erepa SiKaiorepa kol dfielvco kou 
 d KaXXico twv efxTTpoadev, (f)€p€ 9 tov tu>v toioutqjv av 
 \}/oyov irep\ rr}? TOiavrr)? /3/ay, dp', el peXXei fxrj 
 KaTayeXaaTOTaTO? elvai iravTcov, wdvra avTw pdXAov 
 XeKTtov €KdaroT€, 7tXt}v g>? alcr\pd kol aSiKa kou ; 
 kolko: TrtTrovOacTLV 01 (3iaa0evT€? vtto tcov (3iao~a- 
 fxevcov ; 
 
 NE. SO. ' AXydearara Xeyeis. 
 
 SE. 'AAA' dpa tdv p.ev ttXovctlos 6 fiiaadpLevos 77, 
 
 Sifcaia, dv 5' apa wivqs, aSiKa ret fiiacrOe'vTa Icttiv ; 
 
 77 kolv 7T€icra? kolv prj ireicras tis, irXovaios rj 7revr)?, rj 
 
 e Kara ypdpp.ara rj irapd ypdpp,ara, Spa *rd ijvp.(f)opo*, 
 
 tovtov dec kou Trepi Tama tov opov eivai tov ye dXrj- 
 
 difference 
 whether he 
 who does 
 so l)e rich 
 
 or poor. 
 The light 
 of reason 
 and science 
 determin 
 ing what is 
 expedient 
 and just, is 
 the only 
 criterion of 
 good go- 
 vernment : 
 and he who 
 acts by 
 ' this light, 
 howsoever 
 his actions 
 may he de- 
 scribed, is 
 the true 
 ruler. 
 
 such men about such violence, 
 must not this, to avoid being 
 utterly absurd, say everything 
 rather, on each occasion, than 
 that those who are compelled 
 have suffered what is dishon- 
 ourable and unjust and evil at 
 the hands of those who com- 
 pelled them 1 ?" 
 
 Cf. Legg. 9, 875 C : eWi ravra 
 eiTrore tls avdpamos, (pvcrei iKavos, 
 6ela fioLpa yevvtjdels, tvapa\af$eiv 
 bvvarbs e'irj, vopcov ov8ev av beovro 
 tcov dp^ovrcov eavrov. imdTrjprjs 
 yap ovre vopos ovre rdi-is ov8(pia 
 Kpeirrav, ov8e Oepis earl vovv ov- 
 8ev6s vnrjKoov ovbe 8ov\ov dWa 
 iravTotv apxpvra eivai, enrep a\rj- 
 divbs eXevdepos re ovtcos fj Kara 
 (pvcriv. vvv 8e, ov yap e&Tiv ov- 
 bafjLOV ov8apa>s, dXX' fj Kara. j3pa%v. 
 816 8r) to 8evrepov alpereov, rdi-iv 
 Kai vopov, a. St) to fiev ws eVt to 
 noXv opa (col /3Ae7r«, to S' eVi ttuv 
 d8vvare'i. lb. 3, 69 1 C. 
 
 2. (pepe] Cf. Aristoph. Ach. 
 541. Stallbaum makes -fyoyov 
 
 dependent on Xeyav 8a. implied 
 in XeKTeov. Perhaps rightly : 
 but cf. infr. 306 c. 
 
 12. *ra %vp.<popa* ] Most 
 MSS. have prj £vp(popa fj £vu- 
 
 (popa. The rest are divided 
 
 between pf] £vpcpopa fj a£vp<popa 
 
 and pri {jvpcpopa. The correc- 
 tion is due to Cornarius. Cf. 
 Soph. 259 c, Sward, for traces 
 of a similar process of cor- 
 ruption. 
 
 13. TOVTOV KpiLTTCo] " Hd'ein 
 
 consists the rule of right go- 
 vernment as strictly conceived : 
 according to which rule the 
 wise and good man will order 
 the condition of his subjects. 
 As the pilot ever watching 
 over the interest of the ship 
 and her crew, not laying down 
 prescriptions, but getting from 
 his own mind his art for his 
 law, preserves his comrades on 
 board ship, so in like manner 
 a right constitution of a state 
 would be got from those who 
 
 U 
 
1 K) 
 
 IIAATQNOS 
 
 That can- 
 not be 
 gainsaid. 
 
 Olvcotcltov 6p6r)<i woAeoos dioiKijaeco?, ov 6 o~o(pos kou 
 dyaOo? avrjp SioLKrjaei to tcov dpyop.evcov ; coanep o 
 Kvf3epin')T->]? to ttjs vea><? Kfit vuvtcov del ijvpKpepov 
 7rapa(j)vAa.TTa)v, ov ypapfiara Tldeis aAAa ttjv Teyyr\v 
 5 vop.ov TraptyopLtvos, aco^ei tov? avvvavTas, ovtco kou 
 Kara tov clvtov rpoirov tovtov wapd to>v ovtcos dpyeiv 
 8vvxp.e'va>v opdi] ylyvoir dv 7ro\iTela, ttjv Trjs Teyvt]? 
 
 pdopLl-jV TCOV VOpLCOV TTOLpeyOpLeVLOV Kpe'lTTCO J KOU 7TaVTCX 
 
 ttoiovctl roh epLffipoaiv dpypvcriv ovk eo~Tiv a/idprr/pa, 
 io pceyjUTrep av ev peya <pv\aTT(ticri, to f.i€Ta vov kou 
 Te^yqs SiKaioTaTov del SiavepLOVTes toi? ev ty} 7ro\ei, 
 aoi^eiv re avTovs olo'l re coat kou dp.eivov9 e'/c yeipovcov 
 diroTeXeiv Kara to Svvoltov ; 
 
 NE. 20. Ovk eo~T dvTemelv irapd ye a vvv 
 *5 etprjTou. 
 
 SE. K.ou pajv irpos eKeiva ovde dvTippryreov. 
 
 p. 2C 
 
 p. 2C, 
 
 should be able to govern thus, 
 and should bring to the work a 
 power in their art supeiuor to 
 
 the laws." For nep\ TavTa, cf. 
 
 Theaet. 176 c: ubi fors. le- 
 gend, nepl TOVTO. 
 
 5. ovtco — yiyvovr av 7roXireia] 
 
 The clause was at first meant 
 to be in apposition with b'pov 
 elvai, but in yiyvoir av there is 
 a return to the direct form. 
 
 8. na\ navra ttoiovcti — hvvarov\ 
 "And the wise governors, what- 
 ever they do, can do no wrong- 
 so long as they fulfil one great 
 condition, — so long as by dis- 
 pensing to the citizens justice 
 enlightened by reason and 
 knowledge, they are able to 
 preserve them, and, so far as 
 that is possible, to make them 
 better." 
 
 IO. pe'xpmep ev peya (pvTuiTTcd- 
 
 trtv] Cf. Rep. 4, 423 e : eav to 
 
 \eyopevov ev peya Cpv\a.TTa>o~i. 
 to pera vov — Biavepovres] Cf. 
 
 Legg. 4, 714 a : ttjv tov vov 
 
 biavoprjv enovopd£ovres vopov. 
 
 12. o~d>£eiv ts — Kal dpeivovs 
 
 dnoTeXelv] For, as Aristotle 
 afterwards said, the end of a 
 city is not life merely, but a 
 good life. Cf. supr. 293. 
 
 ofot re wen] In apposition 
 with (pv'XdTTcocri. 
 
 14. napd ye — e'lpr/raij " At 
 
 least in contradiction to what 
 has now been said." The re- 
 spondent wishes to reserve his 
 opinion on the main point, like 
 Adeimantus in Piep. 6, 487 b: 
 
 Trpos pev ravrd aoi oioels av 0109 
 
 T e'irj avrenrelv aXXct yap . Cf. 
 
 Gorg. 475 e : ov pot. 8oice~i Kara 
 ye tovtov tov Xoyov. 
 
 16. eKeiva] P. 292 e. 
 
nOAITIK02. 
 
 147 
 
 *y7 
 
 NE. 2fi. Ta 7roia etVey ; 
 
 aE. 12? ou/c ai> 7rore 7rXr}$09 ovft cdvtlvoovovv tyjv 
 roiavTiju Xafiov €7riaTr)/JLr]i> oiov r av yevovro fiera 
 c vov BioiKtiv ttoAlv, dXXd irep\ afUKpov tl koll oXiyov 
 /cat to ev €(ttl ^Tiyreov tyjv fiiav eKeivrjV irokLTeiav 
 ty)V bpdrjv, ras 8' aAAay \iL\n~ipaTa Oereou, axrirep /cat 
 oXiyov irpoTepov epprjOrj, ras jxev eVt tol kclXXlovcl, 
 ray be eVt tol alayia) pLLp.ovp.evas TavTijv. 
 
 NE. 212. 11 coy ; tl tout eiprjKas ; ovSe yap dpTL 
 SrjOev KCLTepaOov to 7rep\ tcov pLLpypLaTcov. 
 
 £?E. Kat pjrjv ov (j)avX6v ye, av Kivqaas tls tov- 
 tov top Xoyov avTOv KaTafiaXr) /cat firj SieXOcov evdel- 
 d ijrjTai to vvv yiyvopLevov dfxdpTrjfjia 7rep\ ovto. 
 
 Still leBS 
 can the 
 former pro- 
 position, 
 that scien- 
 tific go- 
 
 5 vernment 
 must of 
 necessity- 
 be in the 
 hands of 
 very few : 
 and that 
 the other 
 forms are 
 imitations, 
 
 IO more or 
 less imper- 
 fect, of this. 
 This is a 
 weighty 
 truth, 
 especially 
 
 2. ovK covtivcovovv] I. e. Whe- 
 ther rich or poor. 
 
 7. ra? pev — pipovpevas rav- 
 rr]v\ An epexegetic or redun- 
 dant clause. 
 
 9. Has ti tovt c'ipr]Kas\ Cf. 
 
 Leg'g. 12, 968 C : 7TCOS Tl TOVTO 
 
 elprjadai <pa>pev av ; which the 
 
 Zurich editors have pointed 
 differently, putting a mark of 
 interrogation after iras. If 
 this is right, it should be ap- 
 plied consistently to all such 
 expressions, e. g. nag ; tI tovt 
 ernes ; which is of frequent 
 occurrence. 
 
 apri] P. 293 e. 
 
 10. 8rj8ev~] "I suppose." He 
 had accepted the former state- 
 ment, but is now forced to 
 confess that he had not under- 
 stood it. That Srjdev is not 
 always ironical appears from 
 Herod. VI. 138 : rt 8rj dv8pa>- 
 Bevres 8r)8ev iroir]o~ovo-i ; and 
 similar uses of it are more 
 frequent in later Greek. Schol. 
 
 Apoll. Rh. (quoted in the Paris 
 Stephanus) : to 8r)6ev nore pev 
 n\rjpa>pa.TiK6v, 7TOTe 8e cLvt\ tov 
 
 drj'Xabt) 77 as 8tj. Compare the 
 use of SrjTTovdev, Phileb. 62 e, Ion 
 534 a. Badham, who objects 
 to the word, very plausibly 
 conjectures prjBev. 
 
 1 1. Kat prjv irepX ui/to] "And 
 
 yet it were a remark of no 
 little weight, even if one merely 
 threw it out and left it, without 
 discussing and making plain 
 the error which men now com- 
 mit in this matter." 
 
 dv Kivrjcras avTov Kara- 
 
 /3dX?;] " If, having started this 
 question, one should leave it 
 where he took it up." For 
 avTov used metaphorically as 
 here, cf. Gorg. 490 : "E^e S?) 
 
 avTov. 
 
 13. to vvv — dpdprr]pa] I.e. 
 
 The capricious defiance of law, 
 which is worse even than the 
 maintenance of imperfect laws. 
 See infr. 300 a, b. 
 
 U 2 
 
148 
 
 I1AAT0NO2 
 
 when Fol- 
 lowed into 
 its applica- 
 tions : 
 u hen by 
 in.i\ be 
 revealed 
 ill.' error 
 into « bich 
 politicians 
 now-a-daya 
 are fallen. 
 Their best 
 course is to 
 follow tin- 
 traces of 
 the p.iTrct 
 state which 
 have been 
 preserved 
 in laws ; 
 although 
 the main- 
 tenance of 
 law is only 
 a second- 
 best course, 
 and not 
 ideally the 
 best. 
 This ap- 
 pears, if we 
 consider 
 the origin 
 of law, as 
 we may do 
 under a 
 familiar 
 image. 
 
 NE. 20. Wolov 8/) ; p. 
 
 HE. Totov8e tl Set ye tflTelv, ov irdvv £6vr)0e? 
 ovSe padtov ISetV o/xco? pi]v netpcofxeOa Xaftetv avro. 
 (j)e'pe yap' bpdrjs rjpuv llovy)? ovarjs TavTiy? rrj? ttoXl- 
 5 re/ay, i)v etpi]Kap.ev, oiaO* art ras a'AAa? Set rots- 
 tolvti]? auyya.pp.aaL ^pwiievag ovtco acoteaOat, 
 Spcoaa? to vvv e7ratvovp.evov, Kaiirep ovk opOo- 
 Tarov bv ; 
 
 NE. 20. To TToiov ; 
 IO HE. To irapd tovs voptovs p.r]Sev p.r)8eva ToXptav 
 irotelv tcov ev ry wbXet, tov ToXp.covTa Be OavaTco 
 {ripuovaOai Kal iraai toIs eayarois. Kal tovt eartv e 
 bpOoTora Kal KaXXiaT e\ov, u>s SevTepov, eiretSav to 
 wpcoTOV TL5 p.€Ta0fj to vvv Srj prjOev. d> 8e Tpoiro) 
 15 yeyovos eaTt tovto b Srj SevTepov efprjaaLiev, Stairepa- 
 v(op.€$a. T) yap ; 
 
 NE. 20. Haw /xev ovv. 
 
 HE. Ety Sr] Tas etKovas eiravtcopev uaXtv, ah 
 dvayKalov diretKa^etv del tous fiaatXiKOvs ap- 
 
 2o\0VTa9. 
 
 NE. 20. no/ay; 
 
 *9 
 
 2. Set ye ^reiv] "We must 
 certainly examine — with what 
 success Ave may." 
 
 5. tjV elprjKapev] P. 293, viz. 
 
 That which is guided by the 
 consciousness of what is best, 
 in which, according to the lan- 
 guage of the Republic, philoso- 
 phers are kings. 
 
 7. ovk 6p66raTov\ Cf. supr. 
 294 d : eneidrjTrep ovk opdorarov 
 6 vop,os. 
 
 13. as devrepov] Cf. Legg. 
 
 9> 875 c, quoted above. 
 
 eneidav — pr\6kv\ " When 
 
 one has withdrawn from the 
 first and best principle, which 
 we described just now." 
 
 15. &ianepava>pe6a. r) yap j] Cf. 
 Theaet. 173 C : \eya>p.ev 8rj, cos 
 eoiKev . 
 
 18. iivavicdp.ev irakiv ] The 
 image of the physician was 
 employed above, p. 293. But 
 
 the yevvaios KV^epvr^rrjs seems to 
 
 be an echo of Rep. 6, 488 a. 
 Cf. also Legg. 12, 963 b, and 
 Arist. Pol. III. 2, where the 
 virtue of a citizen is infez-red 
 from that of a sailor. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 14!) 
 
 ,;97. J^E. TW yevvaiov KvfiepvrjTrjv koll tov irepcov 
 iroWcov olvtol^lov larpov. KaTibtoptv yap 8r) tl 
 o~yr)p.a ev tovtols olvtols TrXaaapevoi. 
 NE. 20. Ylotiv tl ; 
 
 98. £?E. Toiovde, olov el TravTes nepl avTcov 8tavorj- 
 6elp.ev otl BavoTara vn clvtcdv irdcr^opev. ov pev 
 yap av eOeXrjacoaLV rjpcov tovtcov eKtXTepoL (reopens, 
 6/XOLC09 8rj ct(o(ov(tii>, ov 8* av \cofiao-6ai fiovXrjOcocTL, 
 XcofiwvTai TepvovTes Kal KaovTes Kal 7rpoo~TaTTOvT€? 
 dvaXcoptaTa (pepetv Trap eavTovs olov (popovs, cbv 
 ap.LKpd p}v els tov KoifivovTa Ka\ oi>8ev dvaAicrKovai, 
 
 Suppose 
 men, indig- 
 nant at the 
 harm done 
 
 by the ca- 
 price of 
 physicians 
 and pilots, 
 
 devised a 
 constraint 
 for them by 
 calling an 
 oligarchi- 
 cal or de- 
 mocratic 
 assembly, 
 where all 
 ( who chose 
 might 
 speak, and 
 the advice 
 
 1. erepav ttoW&v dvTat-iov] 
 Horn. II. A. 514 : 'Irjrpos yap 
 avfjp 7roWa)V aurd^ios dWcov. 
 
 2. tl <rxrjp.a Tr\a(rdpevoi\ This 
 
 expression also recals the pas- 
 sage of the Republic just cited : 
 
 Sei e/c iroKXap avro f-vvayayelv 
 elica^ovTa. 
 
 The unchangeableness of in- 
 stitutions is less absolutely 
 fixed in the Laws, where room 
 is left for partial changes and 
 adaptations by constitutional 
 means. Legg. 6, 769 : elnore 
 
 tls em.vor)<reie ypd\j/ai re ws ndWi- 
 <ttov £mov Kal tovt av prj8eTTore 
 eVl to (pavXorepov dW eirl to 
 fieXnov 'laxeiv tov etriovTos del 
 Xpdvov, £vvvoeis otl 6vtjtos &v, el 
 prj Tiva KaTaXefyei StaSo^oj/ — 
 ov tolovtov to tov vopoQeTov — 
 wpcoTOv pev ypd^rai tovs vdpovs 
 — eneiTa — ap o'lei TLva — dyvoelv 
 otl TiapnoWa avdynrj TrapaXei- 
 TTeaQai Toiavra, a del tlvo. £vve- 
 nopevov enavopdovv \ 
 
 3. ev tovtois airots] e'v of 
 the material in which one 
 works ; as supr. 288 c : e£ &>u 
 
 kol ev ols. 
 
 deferred by the explanation of 
 this clause, and the sense is 
 resumed and continued in el 8fj 
 k.t.X., infra. 
 
 10. olov qbopovs] The physi- 
 cian, as being an image of the 
 king, is made to assume a 
 kingly o- X npa. 
 
 1 1 . crpiKpd — Kal oiSer] " Little 
 or nothing." Cf. Theset. 173 e. 
 The influence of the following- 
 argument appears in Ar. Pol. 
 
 II. 5 '• e '*" yovv T<i>v dXXcov eTTL- 
 o-Trjpmv tovto avvevrjvoxev olov 
 laTpiKr) Kivrjdelo-a irapd to. Tzdrpia, 
 <a\ yvpvao-TLtcr) Ka\ d\(ns at Te\vai 
 irdcrai kuI ai 8vvdpeis. Ibid. : 
 ^ev8os 8e Kal to irapd8eiypa to 
 ivepl to>v Texv&v, oi yap onoiov 
 to KLve'iv Te^vrju Kal vopoV 6 yap 
 vopos la\vv ov8epiav e\eL Trpos to 
 ireiQeo-Qai ttXtjv Bid to edos k.t.X. 
 lb. III. 1 1 : to 8e t£)v rexveov 
 elvaL 8oKel irapdheLypa y\re\)8os, otl 
 to Kara ypdppara larpeveadaL 
 (pavXav .... enel Kal tovs laTpovs 
 orav vnoiTTevcoo'L neLO-QevTas roty 
 ex&pols 8ia(p6eipeiv 8ia Kep8os, 
 TOTe Ttjv eK T&v ypaupaTcov depa- 
 TTeiav £r)Tr]0-aiev av pdXXov. 
 
 5. olov el] The apodosis is 
 
150 
 
 riAATONOS 
 
 of unpro- 
 fessional 
 persons 
 mighl often 
 be pre- 
 Eerredj and 
 ii\ there 
 making 
 decrees 
 for the re- 
 gulation of 
 the prac- 
 tice of na- 
 vigation 
 and medi- 
 cine, which 
 should be 
 binding on 
 those pro- 
 fessions 
 for all 
 time. 
 
 rots $ aXXois avrol re kou o'l oiKtrai yjpuwTaV kgu p. 2t 
 8i] kou TeAevTGovTe? ?} irapac ^vyyevwv ?) irapa tlvu>v b 
 e\6pwv tou KapLvovTO? xprjfiaTa puaOov XapifidvovTe? 
 aTTOKTLvvvacnv. 61 r au Kv^pvryrai ptvpia ere pa roi- 
 
 5 avra epyd^ovrai, KaraXemovris re eK tivos tTrifiovXrjs 
 ev tolls dvaycoycu? epyfiovs, kou ac^aXpara •Koiovvres 
 Iv rots ireXdyeaLV €K(3dXXovaii> els rrjv OdXarrau, kou 
 erepa KaKOvpyovaiv. el 8)] ravra SiavorjOevres (3ov- 
 Xevcratp.eOa irepi avruiv (3ovXr)v tlvol, rovroav tcov 
 
 lore^ycov pLi]K€Tt eTTirpeireiv ap)(€ii> avroKpdropi p.r)8e- c 
 repq. ptrjT ovv SovXcov pafjT e'XevOepcov, ijvXXe'ijou 8e 
 tKKXr)(riav r)p.a>i> avru>i>, r) ^vpLiravra rov Sr}p.oi> y 
 rov? ttXovctlovs p.6voi>, e^eivai Be kou IBmatiov kou rtov 
 aXXcou 8-qp.iovpywv irepl re nXov kou wept voaoov 
 
 vbyvcajju-jv ijvpifiaXe'o-Oai, k<xO' 6 ri yjph T01 ^ fya-pp-v-Kois 
 
 i. rols 8' a'XXots] The phy- 
 sician's fee is glanced at also 
 in Rep. i, 341 c : 6 r<5 aKpi(3el 
 Xoyw larpos — norepov xprjpari- 
 (tttjs i(TTLV rj Tcov Kapvovraiv 6epa- 
 7T(vttjs ; Kat Xeye rbv tco ovti 
 larpbv ovra. 
 
 2. rj — ff tivcov] Supr. 261 cl : 
 
 (ocrnep ftorjXdrrjv rj rwa InnoKopov, 
 
 et passim. 
 
 7. eKftdWovcriv] Note the re- 
 turn from the participle to the 
 indicative. 
 
 10. prjdeTtpa] Bodl. p.r)8erepa 
 
 ( sic )- 
 
 11. prjr ovv 8ov\a>v pi)T e\ev- 
 
 de'pav] " No, not over slaves, 
 still less freemen." See the 
 picture of the slave physician 
 of slaves in Legg. 4, 720. 
 
 13. e£elvai he — hrjpiovpycov] 
 
 Sub. anviovv. Cf. Prot. 319 d, 
 Gorg. 456. 
 
 KOI l8l(OTO>V KCU T0)V ciXXav 
 
 8qpiovpyS>v] " Other," i. e. than 
 physicians and pilots. Cf. 
 Protag. 319 c, d. 
 
 15. Kad' o tl XPV erepa rot- 
 
 avra] " What is to be the me- 
 thod of using drugs and sur- 
 gical instruments in our treat- 
 ment of the sick, and vessels 
 also, and the tackling of ves- 
 sels in navigation, and in en- 
 countering dangers, whether 
 those incident to the voyage 
 in the shape of winds and 
 waves, or in encountering an 
 affray with pirates, or perhaps 
 the necessity of fighting at 
 sea with old-fashioned galleys 
 against an armada of the like 
 build." The words 7rp6s rds — 
 Toiavra, though in point of 
 meaning explanatory of irepl 
 tovs Kivbuvovs, return to the 
 construction with naff on xpl 
 — XP r ) (T ^ at — 1 "°' J ttXoiois. 
 
IIOAITIKOS. 151 
 
 298. rjfJ.a.9 kou toIs iarpiKois bpydvots 7rpbs tovs Kap.vovras 
 
 d XPW@ a h KaL $t) KOLL TOLS TtXoLOIS T€ OLVTols KOU TOIS 
 
 vavTiKois bpyavois els Tr\v tcoi> irXoloov yjpeiav koCl 
 irepl tovs klv8vvovs tovs re irpos olvtov rov irXovv 
 ape/mow kou 0aXaTTi]s irepi kou irpos tols toIs XrjcrTous ?, 
 evTev^eis, kou eav vavpLayeiv apa Serj irov paKpois 
 ttXolols wpbs erepa tolclvtoC tol 8e tu> irXi)6eL 86^avra 
 irep\ tovtojv, ewe tivgjv larpwv kou KvfiepvrjTwv e\r 
 aXXcov 18lootcov £vp.$ovXevbvToov, ypco\ravjas ev Kvp- 
 fieal Tiai kou o-Tr)Xous, ra be kou dypa(pa irarpia 10 
 e 6ep.evovs eOr], Kara tglvt rf8i] navra tov eireiTa 
 \pbvov vavTiXXecrdou kou tols tcov kcl/jlvovtoov depa- 
 Treias iroieiaOou. 
 
 NE. 20. KopuSfj ye e'lprjKas aroTra. 
 
 3?E. Kar' eviavrov 8e ye apyovTas KaOlaraaOai 15 Then sup- 
 
 . / a ,1 ~ v / ,/> -o,/ pose them 
 
 tov TrXrjUovs, eire e/c tcov irXovcrioiv eire €/c tov or/pov to elect 
 iravTOS, bs av KXrjpovpLevos Xayyavr^ tovs 8e Kara- 
 
 annually, 
 either by 
 
 The present is of course a and Persians, which alter not." 
 
 wholly imaginary case. The In the same spirit he recals the 
 
 larpav aipeats alluded to in the old word Kvp(3eo~i just below. 
 Gorgias, 455 b, is not the de- 8. elV aXKav ldia>Tu>v] " Or 
 
 cision of the question who are else private citizens." The 
 
 to be physicians, but the selec- Platonic use of SXXos already 
 
 tion of certain physicians for noticed. Cf. Gorg. 473 c : vno 
 
 some public duty connected tS>v ttoAm-wi/ koI tS>v a\\a>v £evwv. 
 with their profession. Cf. Ar. 11. 77877 tov hrara xpovov vav- 
 
 Pol. III. 6 : So-irep ovv larpbv Set riXXea-dai] Cf. Soph. Antig". 
 
 8i86vai ras evdvvas iv larpols, ovrw 7 I *J '. vnriois Kara GTpe\j/as to 
 
 tovs aWovs ev Tols 6p,olois. Xoinov o~e\p.acriv vavriXXfraL. 
 
 6. paKpoU 7r\olois] The most 15. Se ye] " Yes, and more- 
 antiquated kind of fighting over." 
 
 vessel, of which Plato speaks 17. 6s — \ayxdvrj] This seems 
 
 as an English writer of the to refer only to « tov 8r]jiov 
 
 present day might of the old -navros, see infr. e : 77 tS>v — Xn- 
 
 three-decker. He imagines the x° VTas - 
 
 effect of perpetuating such a The practical and speculative 
 
 mode of warfare in written physician are again contrasted 
 
 laws, like those of " the Medes in illustration of the lawgiver's 
 
152 
 
 IIAATQNQ2 
 
 vote or lot, 
 
 til. is,- to 
 
 whom au- 
 thority in 
 each de- 
 partment 
 should l"' 
 given. 
 Who, when 
 their term 
 of office had 
 expired, 
 might be 
 summoned 
 before an 
 unprofes- 
 sional 
 court, and 
 perhaps 
 condemned 
 and pun- 
 ished for 
 breaking 
 the written 
 regulations 
 in their art. 
 Not con- 
 tent with 
 this, sup- 
 pose them 
 to enact, 
 that who- 
 ever is 
 found in- 
 quiring 
 
 (iravra<i ap^ovra^ apytiv Kara to. ypdppaTa Kvficp- 
 
 VCOVTa? TGLS VOLV9 KOLl TOV9 KUflVOVTO.? lcop€VOVS. 
 NE. 20. Tavr C.TL \aX€7T(OT€pa. 
 HE. 0ec3 8rj kou to peTa. ravra eirbpevov. €7rei8dv 
 5 yap Si) tcov apyovTcov €k<x(ttois b evtavTo? eijeXOfl, 
 Serjcrei 8iKaaTr)pia KaQ'icravTas dvSpcov, rj tcov ttXov- 
 ct'lcov Ik tt poK pier eco? rj ijvp7ravT09 av rod 8rjpov tow 
 Xa)(bvTa?, ds tovtov? eicrdyeiv rovs aptjavTas kou 
 euOvveiv, KarrjyopeLv 8e tov (3ovXbpevov coy ov Kara 
 tora ypa.pLpa.Ta rbv eviavTOV eKvfiepvrjcre ray vav? ov8e 
 Kara to. iraXaid tcov irpoybvcov eOrj' to. avTa. 8e 
 TavTa Kal 7rep\ tcov tov? KaptvovTa? icopievcov. cov 8' 
 av KaTayjsrjcpio-Ofi, Tip.av o tl \prj iraOelv avTCov Tivas 
 rj caroTiveiv. 
 5 NE. 20. Ovkovv b y iOeXcov Ka\ €kcov iv toIs 
 toiovtoi? apytiv 8iKaioTaT av otlovv Traa^oi kou 
 airoTLvoL. 
 
 HE. Ka\ tolvvv 6tl SerjcreL Oe'crOai vbpov liri iracri 
 
 
 p. 2(, 
 
 ..29. 
 
 art in Legg. 9, 857 d. The 
 " slave" says to the true phy- 
 sician : Si pcope, ovk larpevets tov 
 vocrovvra, aWa o-^eSoi' Traibeveis, 
 bj larpov aXX' ovx wf vyirj 8eo- 
 ptvov ylyveadai. 
 
 10. eKvfiepvrjo-e'] He passes 
 
 from the general enactment to 
 the form of indictment in a 
 particular case. 
 
 11. ra avra Be ravra] For the 
 ellipse, cf. Theset. 148 b : ku\ 
 irepl ra orepea ciWo tolovtov. 
 
 13. Tipav — airoTiveiv ] Cf. 
 
 Legg. 8, 843 b, 9, 875 d, alib. 
 
 15. kcl\ inav] "To hold office 
 amongst such people, at least 
 when he has the choice." Com- 
 pare the representation in the 
 Republic (1, 347, 7, 521) of the 
 
 unwillingness of good men to 
 rule. Kal implies that there are 
 cases in which a good man may 
 be compelled to rule. 
 
 18. Kal tolvvv en] " Well, 
 
 further still." 
 
 Kat tolvvv — Berjaei.^ Cf. Legg. 
 i, 634 d, e (the Athenian is ad- 
 dressing the Cretan and Spar- 
 tan) : vp.1v pev yap — fir tS)v koX- 
 Xlcttcov av eirj vopav pr) tjjTelv tcov 
 veoov prjBeva eav irola Ka\a>s avTav 
 rj pr) koXcos fX €l > H- l 9- $ € ^ av l] KQ i 
 i£ evbs o-Toparos irdvTas irvp(pa>- 
 velv wj Tvavra Kakws Keirac devTcov 
 deav k.t.X. And for the ex- 
 pression, Legg. 5, 741 e : 7rp6r 
 tovtols 8' stl vopos eTTCTai nao-L 
 
 TOVTOLS. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 153 
 
 599. TOVTOl?, OiU T19 KV(3€pV)]TlKr]V KOLL TO VOLVTIKOV 1] TO 
 
 vyieivov koll larpiKrjs aXrjdeiav irepl irvevfiaTa re km 
 6epp.d koll yf/vxpci ^tjtcov (paii>r]Tai irapa tol ypdppaTa 
 
 KOU aO(f)l,{pp€VOS QTIOVV 7T€pl TO. TOiaVTCl, TTpWTOV plv 
 
 fxrjTe larpiKOV olvtov prjTe KvfiepvrjTiKov bvop.d^Lv 
 dAAd pceTecupoAoyov, a8oAeo~)(r)v Ttvd ao(j)LcrTr]v, d6' 
 toy BiatyOeipovTa aAAovs vewTtpovs koll avairdOovTa 
 c hriTiOeo-Qai KvfiepvrjTiKrj koll laTpiKrj pLrj /cara i>6p.ov?, 
 a A A' avTOKpoLTopa? ap\eiv tu>v ttAolwv koll t&v voa- 
 ovvtcov, ypatydpevov eladyetu tov fiovAopevov, oh 
 ti^ecrTiv, els Srj tl BiKacrT-qpLov. av 8e irapa tovs 
 vopiovs Ka\ to. yeypap.peva So^t) ireiOeiv eire veov? 
 e'/re 7rpecr(3vTa?, KoAatjtiv tois ia^aTOLS. oi)8ev ydp 
 
 into the 
 
 tlUtll Of 
 
 medicine 
 
 and n.'ivi- 
 
 ion, and 
 is therein 
 
 " wise l><- 
 yond what 
 5 is written," 
 lie shall 
 
 first be 
 called no 
 artist, but 
 a dreamer 
 or a prating 
 sophister, 
 and then 
 be publicly 
 indicted of 
 corrupting 
 the youth, 
 and per- 
 suading 
 them to 
 address 
 themselves 
 
 2. Trvev/iaTa] " Winds," as 
 affecting health. Cf. supra 
 295 d '. {-vpffaivovTcov aWav /3eX- 
 tiovcov to"ls Kapvovcri did irvevpaTa 
 rj ti Koi aXXo. 
 
 Kai deppd koi yfrvxpd] I. e. the 
 more general inquiry which in- 
 cludes the subject of winds. 
 
 6. peTeiopoXoyov, ddoXicrxrjv 
 
 riva <ro(pi(TTr]v] See the well- 
 known passage, Eep. 6, 48 S e : 
 
 tov cos d\r)8cos Kv^epvr]TiKov ovx 
 rjyel av tco bvri perecopocrKOTrov re 
 Kal d8o\eo~xrjv koi a^prjcrrov acpicri 
 nakelcrdai vno tcov ev rals ovtco 
 KartcTKevacrpevaii vavcr\ TvKcoTqpcov. 
 The phrase ra peTecepa Ttpdypara 
 would apply equally to the 
 winds, the subjects of the phy- 
 sician's study, and the stars, 
 which the true pilot must un- 
 derstand. 
 
 HereapoXoyov — 8ia<pdeipovra 
 aXXovs vecoTepovs pr) Kara vo- 
 
 fiovs] The indictments of Ari- 
 stophanes and Meletus against 
 Socrates are here combined. 
 
 In both clauses there is perhaps 
 an allusion to the death of So- 
 crates. Cf. also Soph. 2 2 5 e. 
 
 7. cos biacp6eipovTa\ This de- 
 pends On ypatydpevov. 
 
 9. avTOKparopas ] Cf. supra 
 298 C 
 
 avroKparopas apx^iv ] Cf. 
 Ar. Pol. I. 6 : dionep ovk avro- 
 yvcopovas fieXriov Kptvetv, dWa 
 Kara to. ypdppara teat tovs vopovs. 
 lb. 7 . 
 
 apxeiv depends immediately 
 on neideiv, and is coordinate 
 with eVm'0ecr0at, though dXKci 
 strictly requires some construc- 
 tion dependent on eVtr., e. g. 
 the participle apxopras. 
 
 10. tov (3ov~k6pevov, ois e£e<rTiv] 
 
 " Whoever will of those who 
 have the legal power." 
 
 11. els 8rj ti 8iKacrTT]piov] Cf. 
 Meno 81 C : TeXevTav, 6 S17 dno- 
 6vrjcTK€iv KaXovaiv. 
 
 I 2 . yeypappeva\ Sc. ypdppara 
 Trepl TOVTCOV. 
 
 13. ov8(v yap 8eiv] " For no 
 
154 
 
 nAATONOS 
 
 tn tin'.-.' 
 
 sciences in 
 a manner 
 
 contrary to 
 the laws. 
 
 Lastly, if 
 he be found 
 guilty his 
 punish- 
 ment shall 
 
 I >!• <X t I-I'llll ■. 
 
 For no one 
 
 IRvd.s lie 
 
 wiser than 
 the laws, 
 which he 
 who runs 
 may read, 
 both on the 
 public mo- 
 numents, 
 and in the 
 voice of 
 custom. 
 
 8eii> tu)u v6fia>v dvai cro(f)U)T€pov ovde'isa yap ayvoeiv p- 
 to re larpiKOv Kcii to vyieivov ov8e to KvfiepvmiKov 
 Kai vavTLKov' t^eivai yap tw /3oL>Ao/xeW p.av6aveiv 
 yeypap.fitva Kal iraTpia 607] Ktlfieva. Tama 8rj irep'i d 
 
 5 re Tamas tcls £irL0-T7)\xa<i el yiyvouro ovtws a>9 Xeyo- 
 jJLtv, (6 ^.ooKpaTe?, Kal GTpaT-qyiKrjs Kal tjvp.7racrr)? 
 -qaTLVoaovv Q-qpevTLKrjs Kal ypa(f)iKrj$ rj ^vp.Trao~r)9 
 fxepo? otiovv fjLifxrjTiKrj? Kal TeKTOviKrj? Kal ^vvoXrjs 
 biroiaarovv aKtvovpyias rj Kal yecopyla? Kal tyjs irepl 
 
 lord (fivTct ijvvoAi]? re'^^y, 17 Kal Tiva i7r7ro<popl3iav au 
 /cara avyypa/ui/iaTa deaaalpLeOa yiyvopLevrjv rj £v\x- 
 7raaav ayeXaiOKopuKrjv rj jiavTLKr)v rj nav o tl fxepos 
 
 one need be wiser than the 
 laws." ovSev is adverbial. The 
 inevitableness of the philoso- 
 pher's fate is again stated in 
 the Gorgias, p. 521. 
 
 4. Kai -rdrpia Wrj ] These 
 
 are described in Legg. 7, 
 793 0. 
 
 ravra Stj ire pi — Kara re'xvtjv '] 
 
 " If such were the proce- 
 dure, Socrates, about these 
 sciences, and about generalship 
 and the other kinds of hunt- 
 ing, or painting and every 
 department of imitative art, 
 or carpentry and every handi- 
 craft, or husbandry and all 
 vegetable culture, or were we 
 to see an art of horsebreeding r 
 or the tending of any herd 
 conducted according to written 
 rules, or soothsaying, or any 
 other ministerial function, or 
 draught-playing, or any other 
 science conversant with num- 
 bers, whether simple, or square, 
 or cube, or comprising motion 
 — what aspect would be pre- 
 
 sented by a world in which 
 everything was done in this 
 way, in which written pre- 
 scriptions took the place of 
 scientific principles'?" 
 
 The Stranger takes every 
 opportunity to exercise his 
 pupil in recognizing the 
 " kindred " between divers 
 arts. Many threads of pre- 
 vious discussion are here 
 taken up. 
 
 6. arparTjyiKrjs Kai — drjpev- 
 tik'js] Cf, Soph. 22 2 C, 
 
 227 b. 
 
 7. ypacpiKrjs rj — pepos otiovv] 
 He reverts to the accusative 
 after 7rep\ (ravras ras eirio-rrjpas 
 supr.) in order to avoid the 
 confusion of a double genitive. 
 
 For the peprj rrjs pipr]TiKrjs, cf. 
 
 Soph. 235 c. ^ 
 
 9. o~K.evovpyia.s~] Soph. 219 a. 
 yeapyia] Ibid. 
 
 10. (7T7ro(£. — dye\aioKop.~\ Su- 
 pra, 261 d, 276 a, 
 
 12. paPTLKrjv — oiaKov.] Supra 
 290 c. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 155 
 
 99. SiaKOuiKT) 7re pielXyfpev, rj ireTTetav r) ^vparacrav dpi- 
 
 OixrjTLKrjv, yjnAyv, e'/re mhre&ov eire iv fidOecnv eire iv 
 
 Toytaiv ovadv 7rov, — irepi diravra raura ovrco Trpar- 
 
 TOfieva tl 7tot dv (Pavelr}, Kara avyypdfxpara yiyvo- 
 
 /xeva kou per) Kara, rtyviqv ; j 
 
 NE. 20. ArjXov otl Traaai at riyyai iravTtXcos 
 
 av 0^0X0^6^ rjpuv, Kal ovSe eiaavdis yevoLVT av irore 
 
 81a tov aTTOKcoXvovTa toutov ^rjTelv vo/jlov ware 6 
 
 (3lo?, gov Ka\ vvv ^aA67roy, els: tov yjpovov iicelvov d(3l- 
 
 4joo. wtos yiyvoLT av to irapdwav. 
 
 What 
 
 would I" 
 the result 
 of this pro- 
 cedure, it' 
 applied to 
 these or 
 any other 
 arts? 
 
 Theywould 
 simply be 
 destroyed, 
 and that 
 without 
 hope of re- 
 covery : so 
 that life 
 would be 
 ' an intole- 
 rable bur- 
 den. 
 
 1. TreTTelavj Infr. 292 e. 
 7reTTeiav dpi6prjTtKT]v] Cf. 
 
 Legg. 7 j 820 d : coiks yovv r] re 
 7rerre/a Kal ravra dXXr)Xa>v ra pa- 
 SrjfiaTa ov TrdpnoXv Kexooplcrdai. 
 dpidprjTiKrjv, i\riXr)v iv ra^e- 
 
 aiv] Supra 258 c, 284 e. 
 
 2. elr iv (UdOecnv eir iv rd^e- 
 <riv\ rdxea-tv Par. E ; iravyzuiv 
 ParH. Cf.SUpr. 284 c, rax^ras, 
 and note : 294 d, iraxvTcpov : ubi 
 Par. F, raxvrepov. Arithmetic 
 here includes mathematics, pure 
 and mixed. Cf. Legg. 5, 746 e : 
 vopicravTa irpos iravra eivai XPW 1 -- 
 fj.ovs ras t£>v dpidpcov 8iavopds 
 kcu iroiKiXcreis, ocra re avrol iv 
 eavTois ttoikiWovtcii kcu ocra iv 
 prjKcai Kal iv fiadecri noiKiXpaTa, 
 kcu 8r) Kal ev <p66yyots Kai Kivrjcrecri 
 rais re Kara ttjv evdvnoptav ttjs 
 ava Kai Kara (popas Kai ttj? kvkXco 
 
 7Tfpicpopas. (The last clause 
 affords a further comment on 
 
 ra^e'cnv.) 
 
 3. ovTca TTparropeva] Imper- 
 sonal. For the form of sen- 
 tence, cf. Rep. 4, 434 a : tcktcdv 
 — ndvra rn'XXa peTaXXaTTopeva, 
 dpd croi civ ri 8oksI K.r.X. In 
 
 connexion with this passage, 
 
 see Gorgias 455 b : orav nepl 
 
 larpav alpecrecos f/ rfj ttoXci ctvXXo- 
 yos r) irepi vavnTjycov r/ irepi ciXXov 
 tivos 8rjpiovpyiKov edvovs, ciXXo tl 
 r) tots 6 prjTopiKos ov crvpfiovXev- 
 crei, 8rjXov yap otl iv eKacrTr] al- 
 pecrei tov TexvLKaTaTov Set alpel- 
 crdai. 
 
 4. koto, avyypdppara yiyvo- 
 
 p.eva] Contrast with this the 
 praise of the Egyptian conven- 
 tionality in art, Legg. 2, 656 e : 
 
 AG. napct tovt ovk i£rjv ovre £eoypd- 
 (fiois ovt aXXois ocroi o~xhl JiaTa Kal 
 SnoV ciTTa dncpyd^ovTai. kulvoto- 
 psiv ovc? inivoeiv a'XX' arret fj to. 
 7rarpta, ovtle vvv 'i^eariv, ovt iv 
 tovtois ovt' iv povaiKyj ^vpirdo-rj. 
 ctkottuiv S evprjcrfis avTo6i to pvpio- 
 CTTov'tTosyeypappiva rj TCTVTrapeva, 
 ovx cos enos elneiv pvpiocrTov dXX' 
 ovtcos, t£>v vvv 8f8r]p(.ovpyT]pevav 
 oi/'re rt KaXXiova ovt atc^ia), ttjv 
 avrrjV 8e T€X vr l v dneipyacrpeva. 
 KA.QavpaaTOV Xeyeis. AG.Noyno- 
 deriKov pev ovv Kal ttoXitikov vrrep- 
 (BaXXovTcoc. 
 
 6. AtjXov — to Trapdnav, infr. 
 apa ov — KaKov, dpapTrjpaTOS 
 
 jjvyypappaTcov] Note the tragic 
 cadence of these clauses. 
 
 X 2 
 
[56 
 
 IIAATONOS 
 
 Bui things 
 would tall 
 into -till 
 greater 
 confusion , 
 if i he men 
 appointed 
 
 mart ments 
 disregard- 
 ed them, 
 
 not in the 
 interest of 
 
 but of 
 their owi 
 private 
 
 For the 
 laws have 
 at least 
 some basis 
 of experi- 
 ence and 
 of plausible 
 counsel. 
 Hence if 
 laws are 
 made, it 
 is best, 
 though 
 only second 
 best, that 
 they should 
 be en- 
 forced. 
 
 HE. TV <5e roSe ; a Kara avyypap.\xaTa fxev av- p. y- 
 ayKatpi/iev Zkolcttov yiyveadai tqjv elpi]fjevo)v koll tois 
 avyypa.jj.ij.aaiu rj/jaiv e7riaTaTelv tov yetpoTovrjOevTa 
 7) Xa^ovra e'/c Tvyr/s, ovtos 8e fn]8ev (fjpovTiQuv rwf 
 
 sypafjfjaToov i] fcepSovs kveKev tlvos 77 yapLTOS i8ia? 
 irapa ravra eircyeLpol 8pav erepa, /xrj8ev yiyvcoaKcov, 
 dpa ov tov Kaicov tov irpoaOev fiei^ov av en tovto 
 yiyvotTO KaKov ; 
 
 NE. 2ft. 'AA^eo-rara. 
 
 10 3?E. Ylapa yap olfiat tov? vofxovs tov? e'/c Treipas b 
 7roAA^9 Keifievovs Kal tlvcov ^v/j(3ovXcov eKaaTa ya- 
 pi6i>T(o? tjv/jfiovXevadvTcov koll 7reiadvTCov Oe'aOai to 
 ttXtJOos, 6 irapd Tama ToXfidw 8pav, d/iapTrjfiaTOs 
 dfidpT^fja 7To\\a7r\daiov direpyatpixevos, dvaTpeiroL 
 
 \liraaav av wpaljiv en /jeitpvo? tqjv ijvyypa/jfxaTcov. 
 NE. SO. Urn 8' ov pceXXtL ; 
 
 SE. Aid TavTa 8rj toIs nepl otovovv vopiovs koll 
 ^vyypdjjjiaTa TiOe/jevoi? 8evTepos 7rXov? to irapa c 
 TavTa ixr/Te eva firjTe ttXyjOos pL7]8ev fxr)8eiroTe eav 
 
 zo8pav por}8' otlovv. 
 
 IO. Ilapa yap otpai ] The 
 
 sentence begins with an under- 
 stood subject, viz. ovtos supra, 
 but as the irp6rao~is lengthens 
 this is forgotten, and hence, in 
 resuming, the article is intro- 
 duced : 6 Tvapa ravra roXpiov 
 bpav. 
 
 ii. x a P l e VTa >s] I. e. by right 
 opinion without science. Cf. 
 Ar. Eth. Nlc. I. 3 : ol — X a P l - 
 
 earepoi. 
 
 Pseudo-Zaleuc. ap. Stob. (Mul- 
 
 lach.p.543a): rebv §e Keipevav vo- 
 pa>v iav ris 8oKrj prj Ka\a>s neio'dai, 
 perariQevat, in\ to fiekriov. pev- 
 nvrtov 8e, ndvras neidapxelv' as 
 
 vn avdpimwv pev fjrrao-6ai rovs 
 Keipevovs vopovs ov koXov ov8e 
 avpepepov, virb be vopov (3e\rlovos 
 Tjrraipevov KaraKpareladai na\ «a- 
 \6v Ka\ avp<pepov. 
 
 1 8. devrepos nXovs] Cf.Phsedo 
 99 b; Phileb. 19 c, 59 c; Ar. 
 Eth. Nic. V. 2, 9 ; Pol. VIII. 
 2,6. After failing to make one 
 course, we tack and try an- 
 other. 
 
 t 9. tt\tj6os p.r)8ev ] None, 
 whether rich or poor. Cf. 
 infr. 300 e : ro ra>v ivkovo-mv 
 ■jiKrjBos. Note the emphatic 
 accumulation of negatives. 
 
D0AITIK02. 
 
 157 
 
 }oo. NE. 20. 'Opdm. 
 
 AE. Ovkovv pipy para pev av eKaarcov ravra eh] 
 rrJ9 a\r}0eias, ra, irapa rcov eldorcov eh Svvapiv elvai 
 yeypappeva ; 
 
 NE. 20. n«? $ ov ; 
 
 SE. Kal prjv rbv ye elSora ecpapev, rbv ovrws 
 
 ttoXltlkov, el pepvrjpeOa, iroi)]aeiv rfj re\vy iroXXa 
 
 eh rrjv avrov irpa^iv rcov ypapfxdrcov ovSev (j)pov- 
 
 d rl^ovra, birbrav aXX avrco (3eXrlco So^rj irapa. ra ye- 
 
 ypappeva v(j) avrov /cat eirearaXpeva airoval tlo-lv. 
 
 NE. 20. 'E(papev yap. 
 
 SE. Ovkovv dvr]p bartaovv eh y irXrjdos briovv, 
 ols av vbpoi Kelpevoi rvyyavcoo~i, rrapd ravra 6 rt 
 av emyeiprjcrcdO-L Troielv cos fie'Xriov erepov 6v, ravrbv 
 dpcocri Kara, Svvapiv oirep 6 aXrjOivbs eKelvos ; 
 
 NE. 20. Haw pev ovv. 
 
 HE. 'Ap ovv el pev aveiriar^poves ovres rb roi- 
 ovrov Bpcoev, pipeiaOai pev av eiriyeipolev rb dXi]6es, 
 
 Such insti- 
 tutions are 
 at least an 
 imitation 
 of the 
 truth. But 
 IS whoever 
 contra- 
 venes them 
 for the 
 sake of the 
 general 
 good, as- 
 sumes the 
 
 2. piprjpaTa — rrjs dXr/Oeias ] 
 
 Compare the account iu Eep. 
 6, goo, 501, of the procedure 
 
 of the TToXireicbv £mypa(poi. The 
 word yeypappeva here contains 
 associations both from writing 
 (cf. ypdppara above and eVe- 
 araXjiiva below) and painting, 
 as appears from the word 
 
 piprjpaTa. 
 
 emo-Tcov — ttjs dXrjdeias] For 
 the structure of this, cf. 
 Phasdo 65 d : tS>v akXav . . . 
 dnavrcov rrjs ovaias. 
 
 3. napa tusv elhoT<ov\ From 
 the lips of those who know : 
 i. e. dictated by them. Cf. Soph. 
 Oed. Tyr. 285 : irap ov tis av 
 (TKonoov. Sc. twv xapMTus tjvp- 
 PovXevadvTav supr. Cf. infr. 
 
 305 C : irapa vopodeTov fiaai- 
 Xecos. 
 
 els Svvapiv elvai ] Like 
 
 to vvv eivai, Rep. 6, 506 e. 
 Pro tag. 317 a. Crat. 396 e : 
 to pev Trjpepov eivai. 
 
 10. dnovai Tiaiv] I. e. For 
 men from whom he should be 
 absent. The present is used by 
 anticipation for the future, as 
 in Soph. 265 d : t<ov ets tov 
 eirena xpovov aXXoos nas 8o£a- 
 £6vTrx>v. Or, perhaps, because 
 the injunctions continued in 
 force during his absence. 
 
 13. irapa TavTa — ov] "When- 
 ever they do contrary to what 
 is written in their laws, in the 
 belief that another course is 
 better." 
 
other than 
 the law- 
 giver in 
 person. 
 Hence the 
 nearest 
 approach 
 which can 
 be made 
 
 158 IIAATON02 
 
 function of pipolvT av p.evTOi ixav /ca/cwy el 5' evTeyvoi, rovro p. 30 
 
 the law- > ,/ „ , , , , \ \ , ~ , 
 
 river. ovk ecrTiv eTi pipy pa, aXX olvto to aX^OeaTaTOV e 
 
 t Inly we , 
 
 have seen exeivo ; 
 
 mass of NE. 20. YlaVTGOS 7T0V. 
 
 poor' or 5 EE. Kal pijv epirpooOe ye aypoXoyrjpevov rjpiv 
 
 competent KtlTai p.7)8eV 7rXr)0O? fJ.rjS' TjVTlVOVV ftwOLTOV tLVOLl Xa- 
 
 to do this. ~. „ / 
 
 And if an (3eLV TeyVIJV. 
 
 individual -vj-17, ^/-j u ~ \ -? 
 
 do this, he WE. 212. Keirai yap ovv. 
 
 can be no >—it? /■>»«» \ v n \ ' ' v 
 
 Ah*. Uvkovv ei pev eari pacriXtKT] tls Teyyr), to 
 iotqjv 7r\ovcri(x>v irXr/dos kou 6 £vprras drjpos ovk av 
 
 7T0T6 XafioL TTjV 7ToXlTLKr)l> TaVTTjV €7T LCTTr) fl7]l> '. 
 
 NE. 20. Ha>? yap av ; 
 
 SHE. Aet 8r) tol$ TOiavTas ye, d>9 eoiKe, iroXiTeias, 
 ^rnmeift ' eL p.eXXovcrL KaXcos ty]v akr]6ivr]v eKelvrjv ttjv tov eVo? 
 by states, 15 ytterct te)(vt]9 apypvTOs TroXiTelav eh 8vvap.iv pipL-qcra- p. 301 
 the strict aOat, p.r)8eiroTe Keipevav avTols tg>v vop.a>v p.rj8ev 
 of the laws -jroieiv Trapa. To, yeypappeva /cat iraTpia edrj. 
 
 etna, cus- 
 
 tomsof NE. 20. KdXXlCTT e'lpTjKas. 
 
 their fore- ' * 
 
 fathers. 3*E. OrCCZ/ a/JOC Ot 7rX0VCTL0l TaVTTJV flL/JLCOVTai, 
 
 rich do so, 20 rore apicrTOKpaTiav KaXovpLev ttjv TOiavTrjV ttoXl- 
 
 itiSarl " ' . « ' *v «* / v , ;*. », 
 
 stocracy; TeiaV OTTOTaV 0€ TCOV VO/100V /XT) (bpOVT^COCTLV, oAl- 
 
 when they , 
 
 neglect the yapyiav. 
 
 oligarchy. NE. 20. K^oWeuet. 
 
 When one _ Vf , 9 ^ „ x , 
 
 rules ac- A Hi. i\.cu /x?;^ oiroTav av ^tis* eis apxy Kara vo- 
 
 cording to , \ y / a « / » „ 
 
 law, it is 25 p.ovs, pLip.0vp.ev09 tov eiricrTr]pova, paaiXea kclAov- 
 
 royalty; > 5, ,y. , , x » > / * 
 
 when in \**V, Of OLOpiCflVTeS OVOJJLaTl TOV p.€T eTTLaTyfXrjS Tj h 
 
 spite of jv 1 >- \ / 
 
 law, falsely 00^77$- /car a i/o/iow p.ovapxovvTa. 
 
 1. 7rai/] Cogn. or adv. ace. 24. av *ns* ] MSS. aWiy. 
 as in irav Tovvavrlov. Cf. Legg. The correction is due to 
 4, 718 e : 7rac dyanrjTov. Badham. Cf., however, Soph. 
 
 2. ovk — ert fi'ifirjfia] Cf. Soph. Trach. 1 234: flJ]Tp\ fiep Baviiv 
 240 a : erepov 8e Xe'yets rotovroj/ — aot t avBis as e\fis e^etv. 
 aKrjdivov ; Cratyl. 432 C 26. rj bogrjs Kara vopovs] The 
 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 1 5<) 
 
 3° 
 
 i. NE. 20. ¥>.Lv8vvevopLev. 
 
 SE. O^/COW KOLV TLS apa €7rKTT7]/JL(Ol> 0UTC0S OiV CIS 
 
 ct-PXy? iravTcos to ye bvopa tclvtov (3ao~iAevs kcll ov8ev 
 eTepov 7rpoo-pi]@i]creTai' 81 a 8rj to. ixevTe bvopaTa 
 rcov vvv Aeyop-e'vcov iroXtTemv ev pcovov yeyovev. 5 
 
 NE. 20. "Eot/ce yovv. 
 
 SiE. Tt 8' otolv prjre Kara vop.ovs p.rfe Kara edrj 
 c irpaTTrj tls els ap^cou, irpoairoLrjTaL 8e eocnrep 6 eiri- 
 aTypLcov, w? apa it apa. to. yeypappeva to ye /3e'A- 
 tlcttov 7roir)Teov, rj 8e tls eiriOvpua kol ayvoia toutovio 
 
 affecting 
 wisdom, 
 tyranny. 
 And when 
 one rules 
 by wisdom, 
 and is su- 
 perior to 
 the laws, 
 this too is 
 royalty, but 
 in a sense 
 which an- 
 nihilates 
 the other 
 so-called 
 govern- 
 ments. 
 
 words koto, vopovs are a limita- 
 tion of fiera 86£r]s — povapxovvTa, 
 not of e7naTi]ij.T]s, and distin- 
 guish the constitutional mo- 
 narch from the tyrant. 
 
 4. 6Y a 8fj — yeyovev] "Where- 
 fore we have found that the 
 five names of the constitutions, 
 of which men now speak, 
 are resolved into one only." 
 Badham corrects A (i.e.rerra/ja) 
 bfj Ta 77evre ovo/xara to>v Xe- 
 yopevcov trokireiaiv povov yeyovev. 
 
 But how can the five have be- 
 come four, when the fifth kind 
 immediately reappears ; and 
 all five are enumerated just 
 below? It is true that the 
 distinction of knowledge or 
 ignorance (or of the better 
 and worse imitation of know- 
 ledge) is substituted for the 
 distinction between persuasion 
 and force. But this applies in 
 a measure to apio-TonpaTia and 
 
 oXiyapxla as well as to PaaiXeia 
 and Tvpawis. The true fiao-ikevs 
 is only introduced here in 
 order to define the tyrant who 
 affects to act the same part ; 
 
 and the words Si' a — yeyovev 
 
 recall the assertion of supr. 
 
 293 c, that the government of 
 knowledge was the only go- 
 vernment (8ta(pep6vTa>s 6p6i)v ml 
 p,6vr]v iroXireiav), and the rest 
 not governments but imita- 
 tions of government, some 
 better and some worse. Cf. 
 also supr. 300 e : ttjv ahrjdtvriv 
 eneivrjv, ttjv tov evos. pera rexm/s 
 apxovros. infr. : tov eva iicelvov 
 povap^ov. 302 e : ttjv opdrjV £77- 
 Tovo~i tovto to rprjpa ovk r/v 
 
 Xprjo-ipov. For vvv, cf. 291 e: 
 
 irpbs to (Hiaiov ivov <a\ eKovaiov 
 <inoo~KOTrovvTes vvv — Tvpocrayopev- 
 ovaiv. Legg. 4, 714b: 7ro\iTeiS>v 
 
 apTi 8ieXr]\v8apev oaa Xeyov- 
 
 o~iv ol noXXoi. 
 
 8 . wpoo-ivoirjTai — eTno-Trjpcov ] 
 
 Sc. npaTTetv. Compare the el- 
 lipse of the infinitive after <pai- 
 
 vopai, eldov, &C. 
 
 acrnep 6 eTrio-Trjpcov] Sc. npar- 
 
 TfLV. 
 
 9. to ye PzXtio-tov ] I. e. 
 Although in all else the laws 
 be observed. 
 
 10. emdvpla re Ka\ ayvoia — 
 rjyovpevT]] Cf. Rep. 8, 554 b : 
 
 ov yap av TV(fiX6v -qyepova tov 
 Xopov io-TrjcaTo na\ eWipa paXio'Ta. 
 Compare also the picture of 
 
]f>'() 
 
 rTAATONOS 
 
 The reason 
 of these 
 forms i*, 
 that the 
 true mon- 
 arch is no- 
 where to 
 he found : 
 and men, 
 despairing 
 of his ad- 
 vent, have 
 had re- 
 course to 
 convention 
 and law. 
 
 tov pi.pyp.aTO? ijyovpevr/, p.cov ov tot* tov toiovtov p. 30 
 tKaorrov Tvpavvov k\i]T€Ov ; 
 
 NE. 2Q. TV p.i]v ; 
 
 3E. Ovrco 8rj Tvpavvos re ye'yove, (frapev, /cat 
 5 fiacrikevs /cat oXiyapyjia /cat upiaTOKparia /cat 8r]po- 
 Kparia, hvaytpavavTozv tcov dvOpcorrcov tov eva eKel- 
 vov povap^ov, /cat aV laTrjaavTcov prjhiva rr)? TOiavrrj? 
 dpXV? d'tjiov av yeveaOai irore, ware lOeXeiv /cat d 
 SvvaTOV elvai fierd dperi}? /cat einaT-qprj? apyovTa rd 
 10 diKaca /cat oaia hio.vip.ziv opOco? 7racrt, Att>/3aa-#at <5e 
 /cat cmoKTivvvvai /cat kolkovv ov av fiovArjOfj eKaarore 
 rjp.cov' eVet yev6p.evov y d.v olov Aeyopcev, ay air da Boll 
 re av /cat oIk€lv dLaKvfiepvcovTa evdaLpovcos opdrjv 
 
 aKpificDS pLOVOV 7T0\lT€LaV. 
 
 15 NE. 20. llwy tfou; 
 
 HE. Nw £e ye birore ovk eart yiyvopevos, a>? 8rj 
 (fiapev, iv rai? iroXecn ^aaiXev? o!os iv o-pLrjveo-iv 
 ipKpverai, to re acopia evOijs /cat ttjv ^vyr^v oia(pipcov e 
 
 the individual in a state of 
 " tyranny" in book 9, esp. 572 
 e, sqq. 
 
 4. K(ii Pacrikevs] In the former 
 of the two senses mentioned 
 above. 
 
 7. Ka\ CLTnarr-qaavrav] Com- 
 pare the language of Aristotle 
 and of Plato himself in the 
 Laws, already quoted supr., 
 notes on pp. 294, 296. 
 
 10. XeofiacrSai Se] Sc. fjyov- 
 fievcov navTa riva av, supplied 
 fl'Oni dm<TTr)(rdvTcov [irjdeva av, 
 
 supr. Cf. Soph. Ant. 263 : 
 alib. 
 
 I 2 . dyando-dai — av ] He 
 
 would be welcomed. Cf. Rep. 
 
 6, 499 e : 12 /xaKapie, *}v S' eyco, 
 
 fxtj ndvv ovTu> rS)V 7roWa>v Ka- 
 rrjyopei, dXXolav rot 86t-av e£ovo~i.v 
 k.t.X. 
 
 14. fiovov] Masculine. Note 
 the inverted order and tragic 
 rhythm. 
 
 1 6. onoTe ovk eari yt.yv6p.evos] 
 " Since there does not arise a 
 king in states as in hives (at 
 least so we think), one un- 
 mistakeably surpassing both in 
 body and mind, it follows that 
 we are obliged to meet and 
 make enactments." For this 
 meaning of Snore = quoniam, 
 cf. Euthyd. 297 d, and com- 
 pare Ar. Pol. III. 8. 
 
 18. to re oSijia evdvs] I. e. 
 
 At the first glance, before his 
 
110AITIK02. 
 
 161 
 
 {oi. eis, Set 8rj avveXOovras ^vyypdppara y parens, &>$■ 
 eoiK€, pLtTadeovTCLS TO. 7-779 d\r)0€<JTa.Tr)s TToXureiav 
 
 NE. 2Q. Ktvdvvevei. 
 
 HE. Qavp.dtpp.ev drjra, co ^coKpare?, kv rah roi- 
 avrats 7roXireiai$ 6o~a ^vpftaivei ylyveadai KaKa koii 
 oaa ^vpfirjaerai, roLavrr)? tt)s KpY]7r18os vTroKeipevr)? 
 avrai?, rrjs Kara ypdppara Ka\ eOrj pi) perd eVncrr?;- 
 prjs irparrova^ ray irpd^eis ; erepa TTpoo~y^pu>pevr) 
 502. iravri KarddrjXo? d>9 irdvr dv SioXe'aeie rd # eV carry* 
 yiyvoptva. r\ Ikuvo i]piv Oavpaareov paXXov, d>9 
 iayypov ri ttoXis earl (Pvaei. ; irdaypvaai yap 8rj 
 roiavra at 7roX€is vvv yjpovov airepavrov, opens euiat 
 rives avrcov p6vtp.oi re elcrt K.a\ ovk avarpeirovrai' 
 
 5 And do 
 we wondi 1 
 
 that ninny 
 evils should 
 arise in 
 
 states thus 
 based on 
 ignorant 
 custom ? 
 Ought 
 10 we not 
 rather to 
 admire the 
 strength of 
 the social 
 bond which 
 can endure 
 this strain ? 
 For there 
 are still 
 
 mental qualities can be known. 
 Cf. Ar. Pol. VII. 13 : El pev toL- 
 
 vvv t'irjcrav toctovtov 8ia<pepovTes 
 arepoi twv aXkcov, oo~ov tovs deovs 
 Kai tovs rjpeoas rjyovpeda dvOpancav 
 8ia(pepfiv, cuGus npSiTov ko.t<x to 
 crwfjia ttoWtjv exovres VTrep(3o\r]i' : 
 fira Kara ttjv yjsvxrjv, wore dvap,- 
 Cpta^rjrrjTov eivai (cat (pavepdv ttjv 
 vnepoxrjv rots apxopevois ttjv tS>v 
 dpxdvTcov, 8r/Aov on j3e\riov alel 
 tovs avrovs pev cipxciv tovs S' 
 apxeo-6ai KaBaira^' inel 8e tovt 
 011 pa8iov kajSelv, oi8e eartp, 
 ao-wep ev "lv8ois Cprjal 2kl»Aci£ eivai 
 tovs (3acri\eas toctovtov 8ia<pepov- 
 Tas tS>v dpxop.ei'a>v, qbavepov, k.t.A. 
 2. peTctdeovTas — "x vr l ] Cf. 
 Soph. 226 a : Toiov8e ti peTade- 
 ovTas 'lx vos 0-vtov. Perhaps 
 there is a slight allusion to the 
 Homeric per Ixvia ^alve Se'oio. 
 Cf. Phffidr. 266 b. 
 
 7- TTJS KpT]7Tl80S TTjS 7TpOT- 
 
 Toio-rjs ] Viz. a responsible 
 executive. 
 
 9. irepa^ Sc. dpxrj, 01' re^i/r;, 
 
 which is naturally suggested 
 by the preceding argument. 
 
 irpocrxpoypevj] ] Sc. toiovtt) 
 
 Kpr)Tr"i8i. Stephanus conjectured 
 27 from the version of Ficinus : 
 quo si alia qusedam gubernatio 
 vel civitas utatur. But for 
 the asyndeton, which is as- 
 sisted by ttcivtX K.aTa8rfKos as a 
 kind of particle, cf. the usage 
 with 7rdvT(0s, e. g. supr. 268 e. 
 
 Badll. COllj. 7rpaTT0vcrr]s, f) rrpdgis 
 erepa. 
 
 10. *ra €7r' avTjj* ] MSS. 
 tcl TavTT], Badh. corr. Tan avTJj. 
 Qy. vtt' aiirf] 1 
 
 11. ens Icrxvpov ti ttoXis eori 
 (pvaei] Compare Lcgg. 4, 708 
 e : efieXkov ~keyeiv cos ov8els Trore 
 dvOpomcov ov8ev vop.o8eTei, Ti>xai 
 8e Ka\ £vp(popa). navTolai ninTov- 
 crai TravTolcos vapodtTovcri tci 
 Trdi'Ta rfplv. 
 
 14. p6vip,oi\ E.g. Sparta. Cf. 
 Legg. 3, 686 a, b. 
 
1 62 
 
 HAATONOS 
 
 i-it 'us 01 
 men which 
 have exist- 
 ed from 
 
 uiikiiou D 
 
 time, 
 
 though 
 
 many from 
 age to age 
 are seen to 
 founder, 
 like ships 
 at sea, 
 through 
 the preten- 
 tious igno- 
 rance of 
 their pilots 
 and mari- 
 ners. 
 
 Now let us 
 ask which 
 of these 
 bad go- 
 vernments 
 
 noXXai jii]v evlore /cat Kaddirep irXola Karadvo/JLevai p. 31 
 
 SloXXvVTOU KOLL 8loX(o\rX(TL KCU €TL SloXoVVTCU Sid T1)U 
 
 tcov Kv(3epvi-)TU)V /cat volvtwv fioyQ-qplav tcov irepi tol 
 fJL€yi(TTa /jL€ylaTi]v ayvoiav elXifyoTcov, o'l wept ra no- b 
 sXiriKa kolt ovoev ytyvcoaKOvres rjyovvTai Kara irdvTa 
 aa(pearaTa iraacov liriaTr]p.Q>v ravrrji/ eiXrjcpevai. 
 NE. 20. ' AXi-jOlaTara. 
 
 AE. Tt9 OVV St] TCOV OVK 6p0COV TToXlTCLCOV TOVTCOV 
 
 rJKiara )(aX€7rr) avtrjv, iraacov ^aXeircov ovacov, /cat 
 10 tls fiapvTdrr) ; del tl KaTide'iv 77/xaV, Ka'mep irpos ye 
 to vvv irpoTeOlv rj/uv irdpepyov Xeyo/xevov ; ov firjv 
 dXX! e'ls ye to oXov 'laces 7rdv@' eveica tov tolovtov 
 irctvTes Spcojiev \apiv. 
 
 1. 7ro\\a\ p.rjv — elXr](pevai ] 
 " Many however also from time 
 to time are seen to founder 
 like ships at sea, and thus are 
 perishing, have perished, and 
 shall hereafter perish, because 
 of the vileness of their pilots 
 and crews ; men guilty of the 
 greatest ignorance on the 
 greatest subject ; who, having 
 absolutely no inkling of po- 
 litical science, believe them- 
 selves at all points above all 
 other sciences to have master- 
 ed this." Compare the de- 
 scription of the " ship's crew" 
 in Rep. 6, 488. 
 
 KaOdnep irXola] Cf. Legg. 
 6, 758 a '• vavs re iv Bakatrar} 
 TrXeowa — noXis Se axravrcos iv 
 kXvScdvi todv aXXcuv noXecov. 
 
 2. 8i6X\vvraL — 8ioXovvTai ] 
 Cf. supr. 268 e ; Tim. 22 c; 
 Legg. 3, 676 b; 688 d. Hdt. 
 
 3. to. jueytcrro] Sc. to. 7to- 
 
 \iTiKa. Cf. Legg. 3, 688 c : 
 
 rfj XoiTTT) re 770077 KaKia 8ce<p0ap- 
 fieva, fidXtara 8e rfj nep\ ra 
 [liyiara twv dvOpcoTrlv&v irpay- 
 p-drav dpadla. Rep. 6, 5°4 e : 
 tcov 8e p,eyiaTCOV p.r) [ieyt(TTas 
 d^iovv elvai tcls aKpi[3eias. 
 
 4. p.eyio~Tr]v ayvoiav ] I. e. 
 
 the conceit of knowledge. Cf. 
 
 Soph. 229 C: dyvoias — eldos, 
 TTaat rols aXXois avTr/s dvTio~Ta6- 
 fiov uepecriv. 
 
 5. nar oibev] Opposed to 
 
 Kara irdvTa. 
 
 9. x a ^ e7r *l <TV Cv v ] Like 
 ^aXe7roi crvyyeveadai, Rep. I, 
 
 33° c. 
 
 11. ov p.fjv — X ( *P LJ/ ] Cf. Ar. 
 Eth. Nlc. II. 3 : to TeXos ov yva- 
 cris aXXa Trpdgis. 
 
 12. eveKa — x<*P tv ] Cf. Legg. 
 3, 7 01 d : to tlvos 8r) x°-P lv 
 eveKa Tavra eXex@1- 
 
 TOV TOLOVTOV ] Not TOV 
 
 irapepyov (Stallb.), but "for 
 
 the sake of making life toler- 
 able." 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 163 
 
 ;o2. NE. 20. Aer ttcos 8" ov ; 
 
 c SE. T?}^ avTi]v tolvvv (j)d6i rpuou ovcrcov y«Ae- 
 7rr)v StafapovTCos ylyveaOaL koll paarrju. 
 NE. 20. riw? 0i}y ; 
 
 HE. Ovk aXXco?, 7rAr)v povapxiav (jyrjpCt koll 6Xl- , 
 ycov cLpxh v K ® L ttoXXcov, dvaL rpel? ravras rjpiv Xeyo- 
 ixevas tov vvv iwiKexv/JLevov Xoyov kolt apyas. 
 NE. 20. 'Haav yap ovv. 
 £JE. Tauray tolvvv 8lya Tep.vovT€? p-lav eKaarrjv 
 
 eij 7T0LcdpL€V, TY)V 6pOr]V X^pi? tX7TOKp[vaVT€9 TOVTCOV 
 
 efiSofirjv. 
 d NE. 20. Ilwy ; 
 
 S*E. 'E/c filv TTJ9 novapxtas fiaorLXLKrjv koll rvpav- 
 vlkyjv, e'/c <5' av tcov /jltj iroXXtov tt)v re evcovvpov 
 eLpafxev eivoiL apLo-TOKparlav koll oXiyapxioiV e'/c 8* av 
 tcov 7roXXcov tote fi€v airXrjv eirovopLa^ovTzs eTL0epev 
 SrjpoKpaTLav, vvv 8e av koll TavTrjv rjplv Oeriov eVrt 
 SnrXrjv. 
 
 NE. 20. Tied? $r) ; /cat t'lvl SiaipovvTe? TavTrjv ; 
 
 £?E. Ov8ev 8La(p€povTL tcov dXXcov, oi)8 el rou- 
 
 ts the least 
 intolera- 
 ble ! The 
 
 same under 
 
 different 
 
 conditions 
 
 is the worst 
 and the 
 
 least bad. 
 For of the 
 three men- 
 tioned — 
 monarchy, 
 the rule of 
 few, and de- 
 mocracy — 
 each may 
 
 Q he divided 
 into two, 
 so that the 
 forms, in- 
 cluding the 
 best and 
 only form, 
 are seven 
 in all. 
 Under 
 
 g monarchy 
 we have 
 already dis- 
 tinguished 
 royalty and 
 tyranny : 
 under the 
 rule of few, 
 aristocracy 
 and oli- 
 
 garchy. 
 
 5. Ovk aXkcos k.t.A.] " I only 
 revert to what I said before. 
 I say that monarchy, the rule 
 of few, and the rule of many, 
 were the three forms of go- 
 vernment of which we spoke 
 at the beginning of this new 
 discussion." 
 
 7. tov vvv — <ar dpxds] Cf. 
 Legg. 7, 793 b : 6 vvv Sij Ad-yoy 
 tjfxiv emxvdds. Cf. Rep. 1, 344 
 
 d : couirep (Sakavevs rjpcov Karav- 
 TXrjcras Kara tcov cotcov cidpoov Kal 
 Trokvv tov \6yov. Soph. 264 C : 
 en pel^cov Karexvdr] crKOToSivia. 
 
 See also Legg. 3, 682 a : tov 
 
 VVV €7Tc\d6vT0S Tjixlv p(l6oV. 
 
 14 — 16. tcov prj ttoXKcov TCOV 
 
 7toXXoji/] Abbreviated for tijs 
 
 TCOV prj TT. TTjS TCOV IT. 
 
 1 4. evcovvpov] " Of auspicious 
 name." Compare the turn of 
 the sentence in Rep. 8, 544 d : 
 
 Kal »; yevvaia drj Tvpavvls Kal Tra- 
 acov TOVTcov 8ia(pepovcra. 
 
 20. OvSev dicKpepovTi] By the 
 same mark as in the other 
 cases. Lit. " By a mark in 
 nowise different from the 
 rest." 
 
 01)8' 61 TOVVOpa Ta.VTt]S ] If 
 
 we translate, " Even though 
 
 Y 
 
164 
 
 HAATONOS 
 
 vopa rj8i] 8nrXovi> e'trri tuvti]?' dXXa to re Kara 
 vo/jlovs dp^eip kou Trapavo/ioos eaTi kul tcivty) koll 
 tolls aXXat?. 
 
 NE. 20. ' Ectti yap ovv. 
 
 5 SE. Tore p.\v To'ivvv T7)v 6p6i]v (iiTovai tovto to 
 
 TfiijpLa ovk r)v xprjai/Aov, coy eV toIs irpoaOev dire- 
 
 Sel^apev' €7T€i8r) 8e e^e'iXoptv eKeivrjv, tos 8' aXXas 
 
 6@ep.ev dvayKalas, Iv tolvtolis 8r) to irapa.vop.ov koll 
 
 eVVOpLOV 6KaO~T1]V 8i)(0T0p.ei T0VT03V. 
 
 io NE. 20. 'Koike tovtov vvv pr)6evT09 tov Xoyov. 
 SE. Movapxia tolvvv ^ev^Oelaa p.ev ev ypdppacnv 
 ayaOols, ov? vop.ov$ Xe'yop.ev, apio~Trj 7raaoou tuiv e£* 
 avopios 8e ^aXeirii kou (3a.pvTa.TT] ^vvoiKijaai. 
 NE. 20. Kiv8vvevei. 
 15 HE. Tr)v 8e ye tcov p.r) ttoXXcdv, wairep evos kou 
 
 P- 3°3- 
 
 the name of this constitution 
 is already twofold," this seems 
 inconsistent with 292 a. But 
 Stallbaum ingeniously suggests 
 that Plato here alludes to 
 a distinction, which, though 
 not in common use, had been 
 invented by some philosopher. 
 Still it is difficult to see the 
 bearing of the clause when 
 thus interpreted. Something is 
 required in which democracy 
 may be seen to differ from 
 the other names. And this is 
 supplied by the accidental dif- 
 ference that democracy has a 
 twofold meaning, is one word 
 for two things, whereas in 
 each of the former cases there 
 was a name for either side of 
 the division. " Even though, 
 when we come to democracy 
 (?j8r] ravT-qs), we find that the 
 name has a twofold mean- 
 
 ing." Cf. Pheedr. 244 a, twr- 
 \ovv. 
 
 5. tovto to Tfirjpa ] This 
 
 section, viz. the distinction 
 between the use and neglect 
 of law, which was shewn to 
 make no essential difference 
 in the conduct of the perfect 
 ruler. Supr. 292, sqq. 
 
 6. a>s iv tols Trpoo~9ev dne- 
 deiga/iev] It has been shewn 
 that questions of law are in- 
 different to the ruler who 
 has perfect knowledge. Supr. 
 
 293- 
 
 8. dvayKaias] I. e. Such as we 
 are compelled to put up with. 
 Compare dvayKaias, e. g. Rep. 
 7, 527 a: \iyovo~i — •yeAcuW re 
 Ka\ dvaynaioiS. 
 
 1 1 . ^evxdelo-a pev iv ypappacnv 
 
 dyadols] " Subject to a yoke 
 of good prescriptions." 
 
 15. a>ff7rep evos Kal tt\tj6ovs to 
 
nOMTlKOS. 
 
 1()5 
 
 •03. 7r\r)0ovs to 6"hiyov fxeaou, ovtws yyrjcrcofxeOa fxiarjv 
 in ap(f)OTepa' ttjv 8' av rod ttXtjOovs Kara iravTa 
 aaOevrj koll pifiev LirjTe ayaOov Lirjre kolkov fieya 
 8vvapevrjv d>? vrpos ras aXXa? 8lcl to tols ap)(a? Iv 
 TavTY] ftiaveveprjadai kcltol a/j-iKpa eis 7roXXov?. 810 
 yeyove Tracrwv filv voplpcov tcov iroXLTtLwv ovawv 
 tovtwv )(€ip[o~Trj, irapavop-wv 8* ovo~(iov ^vpiraawv 
 b (3eATio~Tr)' koll aKoXaaTcov pev iraawv ovacov kv 
 SrjfxoKpaTia vlko. (r)i>, KoafiiodV 8' ovawv tJklo-tcl Iv 
 
 TaUTT] (3lQ)T€0l>, Iv Tjj irpCdTYf 8e TToXv TTpWTOV T€ KOLL 
 
 apLo~Tov, irXr/v tyjs e(38oprj?' iraatoi' yap iKeivrjv ye 
 
 cracy are 
 interme- 
 diate, and 
 
 democracy 
 in the least 
 powerful 
 
 for good or 
 harm. 
 
 5 Whence a 
 democracy 
 is the worst 
 of law- 
 respecting 
 communi- 
 ties, but the 
 least bad 
 amongst 
 those which 
 despise the 
 laws. 
 Still, there 
 
 oKlyov peo-ov ] There is a 
 Pythagorean tone in these 
 words, similar to that which 
 is observable in the Politics of 
 Aristotle. 
 
 4. 81a. to tcis dpxas — els ttoA- 
 Xovs] The remarks of Aristotle, 
 that much water is less easily 
 fouled than little, and that bad 
 influences in a democracy are 
 neutralized by admixture with 
 wholesome elements, as in the 
 case of food, have an analogy 
 with this observation of Plato. 
 
 8. Ka\ aKo\do~TG>i> pev — /3ico- 
 
 reoi>] This opinion is quoted 
 by Aristotle as that of one of 
 those who had gone before 
 him. Pol. IV. 2 : ttjv rvpawida 
 Xeipio-Tr)v ovaav, nXelo-rov dnexeiv 
 7To\ireias. Aevrepov 8e ttjv oXt- 
 yap\iaV t] yap dpiaroKpaTLa 6V 
 to-TrjKiv dnb ravr-qs ttoKv tt)s 
 noXirelas' perpiwTarTjv 8e ttjv 
 drjpoKparlav. "H8tj pev ovv tis 
 d7rt(pr]vaTO kcu rav irporepov 
 ovto), ov prjv els tcivto fiXeyj/as 
 i)pAV' enelvos pev yap eKpive, ira- 
 (tcov pev ovacov eTnemav, oiov 
 6\iyap\las re XPW T *1 S Kal T ™ v 
 nXXoov xeipio~Trjv bqpoKpariav, 
 
 t£>v be (pavXwv dpl<TTT]v. 'Hpe'is 
 8e oXcos ravras e^paprrjpevas 
 eivai (papeV ko.1 j3eXria> pev 0X1- 
 yapxlav aXXqv aXXrjs ov KaXcos 
 e^ei Xe'yeiv, tjttov 8e (pavXrjv, 
 
 See also ib. c. 4. It will be 
 observed that the last words 
 exactly express the doctrine 
 of the Politicus : so that if 
 Aristotle is alluding to this 
 dialogue he has misunder- 
 stood the author's meaning. 
 This does not prove that he 
 does not refer to this passage, 
 but it does tend to shew that 
 he is quoting loosely without 
 thinking of the context, and 
 perhaps without distinctly re- 
 membering the author from 
 whom he quotes. tis t£>v 
 Trporepov is certainly a cu- 
 rious expression for him to 
 use, if he remembered that he 
 was quoting Plato. But the 
 saying may perhaps be older 
 than either of them. See 
 Introduction to the States- 
 man. For the infinitive, as 
 subject of vim, cf. Soph. (Ed. 
 Col. 1225 : pfj (pvvai tov anavra 
 viKq \6yov. 
 
166 
 
 11AAT0NQ2 
 
 18 do com- 
 
 pari -on be- 
 
 t « sen even 
 
 c. institu- 
 tional roy- 
 ally ami 
 the ideal 
 state. 
 None of 
 these forms 
 deserve the 
 name of 
 govern- 
 ment : and 
 their up- 
 holders are 
 not states- 
 men, but 
 factious 
 partisans. 
 AVe have 
 done, then, 
 with this 
 " crew of 
 Centaurs 
 
 eKKpLT€oi>, olou 6ebi> e£ uvOpo'mcov, €K twu aAAcov p. 30 
 
 TToAlTtlOiV. 
 
 NE. 20. <\>aiv£Tai tovO" outgo ^VjifiaLvtLV re kcu 
 7toli-jtwv ])7T€p Aeyei?. 
 
 5 SE. OvKOVV 8l) KOLi TOV? KOIVCOVOVS TOVTCOV 7U>V 
 
 ttoAitzicov 7raa<jov, ttA^v ttjs e7ncrr?//xoyoy, d({)cup€Teov 
 co? ouk bvTas ttoAitlkov 1 ? etAAa aTacriao-TiKOv?, kcu c 
 eiScDAcov ueyiaTcov Trpoo-TciTOS ovtols kcu clvtovs elvcu 
 TOLOVTOVS, pL€yLO~T0VS be OVTCLS pi/jLr)Tas KOLL yorjTcts 
 
 10 peyiaTovs yiyveaQcu tcov ao(ptaTcou cro(f)io-Ta?. 
 
 NE. 20. KivSvvevei tovto ety rot's" ttoAltlkovs 
 Aeyouevovs TrepiecTTpd<f)6ai to prjua bpOoTara. 
 
 HE. Etez/* tovto fJLev are^co? rj/juv cocnrep 8pd.ua, 
 
 I . olov 6ebv e£ dvBpconcov ] 
 
 Compare Aristotle, Pol. III. 8 : 
 
 el 8e tis €<tt\v els too~ovtov 8ia- 
 (pepcov Kar dperrjs vnepfHo\r]v — 
 axnrep yap 6ebv ev dvdpconois 
 elicos elvai rbv tolovtov. 
 
 7. ovk bvTas ttoXitikovs dAAa 
 (TTaaiao-TiKOvs] Cf. Legg. 8, 832 
 b : ras ou TroXiTCias eya>ye alrias 
 eivai (prjpt as TToWaKls e'lprjKa ev 
 tols 77poa6ev Xoyois, 8r]poKpaTiav 
 Ka\ 6\iyapx.iav Kal TvpavvL8a. tov- 
 tcov yap 8rj iroXireia pev ov8epia, 
 aratruoTeiai 8e 7rdcrai XeyoiVT civ 
 opBorara. 
 
 araaiaa-TiKovs] This is the 
 salient point also in the al- 
 legory of the ship : Rep. 6, 
 488. 
 
 8. eiSwXcoi'] Viz. t£>v ov no- 
 XiTeiiov eiceiveav. 
 
 9. toiovtovs ] Sc. ei'SwXa. 
 
 " The very substance of the 
 ambitious is but the shadow 
 of a dream." Cf. Phsedo 67 b: 
 
 Kadapoi airaWaTTopevoi — peTCi 
 tolovtcov — icropeda. 
 
 I I . KtvSvvevei — opBorara] So 
 
 above, 291 c, the same cha- 
 racter is described as rbv ndv- 
 tcov tcov crocpioTcov peyicrTov yorjTa 
 Kal Tavrrjs tt]S rixyr)S epneipoTa- 
 
 tov, in both places with direct 
 reference to the argument of 
 the Sophist, in which the false 
 politician (not 7to\itikos but 
 SrjpoXoyiKos) is distinguished 
 from the Sophist last of all 
 (Soph. sub. fin.). Cf. Gorg. 
 
 465 C : (pvpovrai ev tco avrco Kal 
 ivepl Tavra ao(picTTa\ Kal prjTopes. 
 lb. 5 21 - 5 a ■ Tavrov J) paKapie, 
 earl ao<piCFTr]s Kal prjTcop. 
 
 12. Tvepiea-rpdcpQai probably al- 
 ludes to the windings of the 
 argument in the Sophist. 
 " After so much turning and 
 twisting, the word has at last 
 fixed itself on them." 
 
 13. tovto pev ex&pio-Qri ] 
 
 rouro has no verb, because the 
 end of the sentence is altered 
 to agree with the middle : 
 thus ixiopiaBrj is substituted 
 for enepdvdrj, or some such 
 word. The clause Kaddnep — 
 
nOAITIKOS. Hi? 
 
 303. KaOdirep ipprjdi] vvv 8rj KevravpiKov bpaaOai /cat and 8a- 
 
 ^LoLTvpiKov Tiva dlaaov, ov 87] \wpiareov utto ttoXltl- have 
 
 d Krj9 elrj T€)(vr}?, vvv outgo irdvv poyis ix^pLady. onoeforall, 
 
 IN Hi. 2,12. <VatveraL. King. 
 
 £?E. Tovtov Se y erepov e'rt yaXtTroiTtpov Xd- 5 remains an 
 
 Trerai too ^vyyevis re bpov elvai paXXov tco /3ao~t At/co3 s un harder 
 
 yevet /cat bvaKarapaOijTOTepov . /cat pot (fjoavopeOa becauseletsa 
 
 \ \ /I / ' r\ rt e <isy to be 
 
 TOL9 TOV XpVaOV KaOaipOVCTl Trat/09 OpOlOV TTZTTOV- discerned, 
 
 /) f and more 
 
 fovea. ofkinto 
 NE. SO. n&s _ -3W 
 
 SE. TtJi/ 7rou /cat XlOov? /cat 7roAA' arra erepa {jJ^'S 
 
 ajroKpLvovat /cat e/cetVot irpbrepov oi Sr/piovpyol' perd j^' *® 
 
 e £e ravra \efarerai ijvppepiypeva ra fjvyyevr) tov if^^, 
 
 Xpvaov rlpia /cat 7n;/)t povov dtycuperd, ^aA/coy /cat j lross > b " fc 
 dpyvpos, tan 6" ore /cat dSdpa?, # [a]^ /xera fiacravGov 15 y e * ellini - 
 
 rat? i^rjaecTL pbyis dcpaipeOe'vra tov Xeyopevov precious 
 
 aKrjpaTOv xpvabv elaaev rjpds' iSelv avrov povov i(j) w llich are 
 
 iaVTOV. nation with 
 
 ^ x that which 
 
 NE. 20. Aeyerat ya/) ovv Srj ravra ovrco yuy- we seek to 
 
 bring out 
 
 veaOai. 20 clear - 
 
 Arj. J\ara roy avrov roivvv Xoyov eot/ce /cat z/iw ciousand 
 
 ,-%><-, v < / , . . / V > kindred 
 
 rjpiv ra pev erepa /cat OTrocra aXXorpia /cat ra prj elements 
 
 0tAa iroXiriKrjs i7rio-rr]pT]? a7roK€)(copio~0ai, XelneaOaL ralsMp, the 
 
 *\ \ 1 v s- - / w y / judicial 
 
 06 ra rtpia /cat fjvyyevi]. tovtojv o eari ttov err pa- function, 
 
 Biaa-ov is suggested by the word move striking image. See this 
 
 Bpapa. described in Faraday's Che- 
 
 6. ra i^vyyeves re opov elvai] mistry of a Candle, pp. 184- 
 
 So Bodl. MS. Vulg. ra gvyyeves 204. 
 
 6' ofMovT. 15. * [a] * ] So Stephanus 
 
 12. ko.1 ene'ipoi] Here also the and Ficinus. MSS. om. 
 
 text follows the Bodleian MS. 17. avrov povov e(j> eavrov] 
 
 13. ra arvyyevrj rod xp v0 ~°v Cf. Slipi*. 268 C : x (0 pi°~ avTes ° 7r ' 
 Tt'/Ltm] The fusion of platinum eneivcov Kadapov povov avrov drro- 
 
 would have afforded a still iprjvapev. 
 
J 68 
 
 flAATONOS 
 
 and that 
 nobler rhe- 
 toric w hich 
 
 is the ally 
 of good 
 govern- 
 ment. 
 \\ e must 
 do our best 
 to part 
 
 these iitl' 
 
 from the 
 
 supreme 
 science. 
 Take music 
 and the 
 mechanical 
 arts. There 
 can be no 
 doubt that 
 they must 
 yield prece- 
 dence to the 
 art which 
 determines 
 which of 
 them is to 
 be learnt. 
 
 Trjyla koll SiKaariKy kcil oai] (3aai\LKfj koivcovovctoc p. 3c | 
 pi-jTopeia ireiOovaa to Slkoliov £vv&La.Kvfi€pva ret? ev 
 tous 7t6\€(tl irpa^eis' a 8i) * ' rivi* Tporrcp paara ti? 
 diropLtpifav Seltjei yvfxvov kou /jlovov Ikiivov ko.0' 
 5 avrov tov ^qTovfxevov v(\j -t]pu>v ; 
 
 NE. 20. Ar/Aov otl tovto tttj Spav TreLpareov. 
 SE. Tlelpas pL€v Toivvv eve/to. (fjavepos earat' 81a 
 
 $€ pLOVaiKtjs OLVTOV ey\€lpT]T€OV SfjXcQOrai. KOLl fJLOL 
 
 Xeye. 
 10 NE. 20. To ttoIov ; 
 
 SE. Mou<tikt]9 eart ttov ti? rjfjuu pLaOrjat?, kou b 
 oAcoy T(i>v we pi xeipore^las €7rio-Tr)pLa>i> ; 
 
 NE. 20. "Earn,. 
 
 S*E. TV 6Y; to <5' av tovtcdv -qvTivovv e'/re del 
 
 I . Ka\ oar) — 7rpdtjets] Such 
 a higher rhetoric is hinted at 
 in the Phsedrus and Gorgias, 
 but more ironically than here. 
 Cf. Gorg. 480 c, e ; Phsedr. 
 271 d, e. The word pijro- 
 pela is peculiar to this place. 
 Perhaps, as Stallbaum thinks, 
 it conveys a nobler idea than 
 prjTopiKTj. The admission of 
 rhetoric into the state is a 
 return to nature similar to 
 the adoption of paid teachers 
 which accompanies it in the 
 Laws. Cf. Legg. 4, 7 1 1 d, e : r) 
 
 ttjv Nearopos — (pvatv, ov rrj tov 
 Xeyeiv pcoprj (petal it&vtcop htevey- 
 Kovra dvdpaircav nXeov %ri t<5 
 acocppovelv hta(pe'petv k.t.A. The 
 npootpta or vovdeTTjTiKcii Xoyot of 
 that dialogue are an example 
 of the kind of rhetoric here 
 meant. Compare also the re- 
 admission of the practical sci- 
 ences in the Philebus. 
 
 3. *7"iVt* Tponcp paaraj I have 
 
 ventured to accent r'm and to 
 add the mark of interrogation, 
 as the superlative seems to be 
 otherwise without meaning ; 
 and the answer of Young 
 Socrates is at least equally 
 apposite when the words are 
 thus taken. Cf. Soph. 241 e ; 
 Legg. 6, 779 e • h v $h Tiva T p6- 
 
 ttqv \pr] £ijv vvp(ptov Kal vvp(prjv ; 
 
 A similar change has still to be 
 made in the text of Phileb. 26 
 e : TeTaprov ri Tore e(papev eivat 
 yevos aKeTTTeov : ubi legend, re- 
 Taprov t'i rare. See Mr. Poste's 
 translation. 
 
 14. Tt he ; to h' av] Ast's 
 
 conj., tL he Toh' av ; has been 
 adopted by the Zurich editors. 
 
 TOVTGtV TjVTIVOVV K.T.X.] This 
 
 thought was afterwards deve- 
 loped into the apx n " eKT0 " lK '? of 
 Aristotle. See esp. Eth. Nic. 
 I. 2. Pol. VII. 3. Compare 
 Plat. Euthyd. 289, 290 ; Cra- 
 tyl. 390 a. Gorg. 517 c Legg. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 169 
 
 I504. fiavOdveiv rj/j.a.9 elre 107, worepa (jjrjcro/jLev eirurrrjfjLrjv 
 av kcu Tavrrjv elvai riva irep\ aura ravra, ?/ 7rco? ; 
 NE. 20. Our coy, eJvai (j)i](JOfxev. 
 SE. Ovkovv eWepav ofioXoyrjcrofiev eKelvcov eivai 
 Tavrrjv ; 
 
 NE.*2Q. Na/. 
 
 HE. Ylorepa 8' avrcov ovSepclav ap^eiv Sew aXXr/v 
 c aXXr)?, rj iiceivas ravrr)?, rj Tavrrjv 8elv eirirpoirevov- 
 aav apyeiv ^vjiTraawv rcov aXXoov ; 
 
 NE. 20. Tavrrjv eKelvcov. 
 
 HE. [Tr)v\ el 8el jiavOdveiv rj /xt) rrj? fiavOavo- 
 jievrjs kcu SidcKTKOvar)? apa av y dirofyaivei 8eiv 
 rjjiiv apyeiv ; 
 
 NE. SO. 20o6> ye. 
 
 aE. Kca rr;t* el Set weldeiv apa rj fxrj rrjs 8vva- 
 jievrjs ireldeiv ; 
 
 NE. 20. Ilcor t? ov; 
 
 HE. Etez/" rm ro ireiariKov ovv diro8coaojj.ev eiri- 
 d arrjjxrj 7rXr)6ovs re Kal o^Xov 81a /ivOoXoyla? dXXa 
 jxrj &a oi8a)(r}$ ; 
 
 NE. 20. Oaz/e^ooi/, olfxai, Ka\ rovro prjropiKfj 80- 
 reov ov. 
 
 HE. To 5' are &a ireiOovs eire Kal 8lol tivos fiias 
 
 So of the 
 art of per- 
 suasion. 
 
 'I'lii i urn t 
 yield to 
 the art 
 which de- 
 cides whe- 
 
 5 ther per- 
 suasion or 
 force is to 
 lie used : 
 i. e. the art 
 of states- 
 manship. 
 Tli en gene- 
 ralship du- 
 
 I0 cides how 
 war is to 
 be conduct- 
 ed : hut the 
 prior ques- 
 tion of war 
 or peace 
 must be 
 decided by 
 another 
 
 j - and more 
 authorita- 
 tive art, 
 which can 
 be nothing 
 less than 
 royal. 
 
 12, 963 : vovv yap 8i) Kvfiepvrj- 
 tikov pev Kcii larptKov e'liropev — 
 top 8e ttoXitlkov iXeyxpvres h>- 
 ravd' ea-fiev vvv. 
 
 1 1. [T^i/] et Set pavBavew r) prj\ 
 
 The old editors, supported by 
 few MSS., insert ttjv before el, 
 which Stallbaum has retained. 
 The Zurich editors read Tavrrjv 
 
 eKelvcov, el del pavddveiv rj prj. 
 
 3. rrjs p. k.t.X. But the tenor 
 
 of the argument makes the 
 retention of ttjv almost impe- 
 rative. Compare similar spe- 
 cimens of analogical reasoning 
 in the Gorgias. 
 
 18. TTeiaTiKov] This word is 
 used again in Legg. 4, 723 a. 
 
 20. pi) 81a 8i8axrj<:] Cf. Gorg. 
 
 445 a ; Theset. 201 a, b. Com- 
 pare the opposition of pvdos 
 and Xo'yos in Gorg. 523 a. 
 
170 I1AATON02 
 
 Set TTpa.TT€iv irpos Tiva? otlovv r) koli to irapuirav p. y 
 j[€)(€wf, tovt av Troia 7rpoa0i]aofxev imcrTrjpir) ; 
 
 NE. 20. Tfj r;;y 7T€i(JTiKr)9 dpyovorr) koli Xektikt}?. 
 
 HE. En; 8e av ovk aXXrj r*?, coy oifiai, irX-qv rj 
 
 5 T0V 7ToXtTlKOV Svvafll?. 
 
 NE. 20. KaAAicrr' e'lpr/Ka?. 
 
 HE. Kat roi}7-o /xe> eWe ra^i; K^wpiaOai ttoXl- 
 
 TLKYjS TO prjTOpiKOV, &>? €T€pOV el8o? 0V, V7TT]p€T0Vl> 
 
 yu^ TavTy. 
 io NE. 20. Na/. 
 
 HE. T7 <5e 7re/0i r^? tolocctS' av Swa/ieco? 8iavo- 
 ryriov ; 
 
 NE. 20. Woias ; 
 
 HE. T77? coy TroXepcqTeov i/cdo-Toi? oW av npo- 
 15 tXwfxeOa TroXejieiVy e'/re avTrjv areyyov eiTt evTeyvov 
 epovfiev ; 
 
 NE. 20. Kai 7rco? az> areyyov diavorjOelpLev, rjv ye 
 rj cTTpaT-qyLKr) /cat iraaa rj 7roXepLLKr) irpa^is irpaTTti ; 
 HE. T^f 5' e'/re 7roX€fir)Teov e'/re &a (piXias 
 20 ajraXXaKTeov otav re /cat hricrTriixova SiafiovXev- 
 
 1. ij «at to irapaTrav fe'xeivf] qualifying an assertion supr. 
 
 Schleiermacher conjectured iav 263 e : ayikaiav prjv £acov. So 
 
 (cf. Soph. 242 a: ro Trapanav ia- pevroi in Rep. 1,334 b: eV 
 
 rkov. And e'av may perhaps have aXpeXelq p.evroi tcov (pikcov k.t.\. 
 
 been mistaken for a contraction 1 4. a>s] How, in what way. 
 of e'xeiv) ; Stallbaum an£x. elv = to 15. eiVe] Interrogative, de- 
 refrain — supposing an to be pending on 8iavor]Teov. 
 absorbed in Tvapairav. (d7re'x«i> 17. 17V -ye] " "Why it is the 
 sc. tov TrpaTTtiv.') Herm. conj. function on which generalship 
 y\o-y)\ia.v e%eiv. Badh. \eyew, and all warlike action is em- 
 with a view to XeKTiKrjs infra. ployed." Cf. Protag. 322 b : 
 
 But XeKTiKrjS is only an ex- ttoXitiktjv rjs pepos 7ro\epiKfj. 
 
 pansion of ireio~TiKrjs. The 19. Tfjv 8 fire 7T.] Bodl. ttjv 
 
 conjecture of Hermann is the Se w. with All. 
 
 best. 20. o'Lav re koi eVto-rij/xoj'a] 
 
 9. p.r)v] (irjv is thus used in "Able through knowledge." 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 171 
 
 1304. aaaOat, Tavrr)? erepav vnoAdficofiev 7) ti)v uvtijv 
 ravrrj ; 
 
 NE. 20. Tol? rrpoaOeu dvayKaiov eirofxevoLcriv 
 erepav. 
 305. 3?E« Ovkovv apyovcrav tclvtt)? avrrjv dirotyavov- [ 
 /jteOa, elirep tols epurpoaOev ye v7ro\rj\l/6/xe$a o/xojW ; 
 
 NE. 20. 0»7/x/. 
 
 £?E. TiV ow 7TOT6 /ecu iTTixeLprjaopLev ovtco Seivrj? 
 kou fxeyaAr]? re\vr)9 ^vpcKacnyi r^y 7ro\ep.iK.r)s Se- 
 cnroTiv dmo§aivecr6ai 7rXi]v ye 8rj rrjv ovtcos ovcrav 
 (3acri\LKi]v ; 
 
 NE. 20. Ovde/xlav dkX^v. 
 
 HE. Ovk apa iroXiTiK-qv ye Orjaofiev, vTrrjpeTLKr^v 
 ovcrav, rrjv tcov arpar-qycov hrio~Tr]p.r]v. 
 
 NE. 20. Ovk gIkos. 
 b S?E. "I#i £77, /cat r?)i> 70)2/ 8iKao-T(ov tcov opOcos 
 8iKa(pvTcov Oeacrco/ieda 8vvap.Lv. 
 
 NE. 20. ria^i; /xeV ovv. 
 
 HE. 5 A/)' o?jj> eVi irXeov ri hvvarai rod 7rep\ rd 
 
 The gene- 
 ral, then, is 
 a servant, 
 and not a 
 5 governor. 
 Let us now 
 examine 
 the judicial 
 faculty. 
 What can 
 this do be- 
 yond the 
 impartial 
 
 8. ovtco — -7ro\eij.tKr]s~\ " What 
 science shall we go about to 
 make supreme over the whole 
 of strategy, a power so for- 
 midable and so mighty?" 
 
 IO. tt]v ovtcos ovcrav /3ao"tX»C7ji/] 
 So the argument is strength- 
 ened by an appeal to language 
 in Soph. 2 2IC: f/ iravrdnaaiv 
 cos dXrjdcbs cro(pto-TrjV. Supi*. 260 
 C : 8ecm6£ovTa ye. 
 
 13. VTrr)periKT)v ov<rav~\ Viz. 
 Subservient to the end of po- 
 litics. So iirrjpeTiv eKeivrjs infr. C. 
 Cf. supr. 260. 
 
 1 6. "181 — Kai] Cf. supr. 267a: 
 (pepe — ml o-vveipcop.ev. 
 
 ig.'Ap'ovv — diaipelv;] "Can 
 
 the judicial art do anything 
 more than, on questions of 
 contract, to determine what is 
 legally just and unjust by re- 
 ference to those fixed laws 
 which she receives from the 
 lawgiving king ; while she 
 brings to the performance of 
 this office her own peculiar 
 virtue, that of being incapable 
 of yielding to bribes or intimi- 
 dation or the appeal to pity, 
 or to any other feeling, whe- 
 ther of enmity or favor, so as 
 to be willing to determine 
 suits between parties other- 
 wise than as the lawgiver has 
 appointed V 
 
 Z 2, 
 
172 IIAATONOI 
 
 and incor- £v/i(3oXaia, irdvO^ oiroaa Keirat vop.ip.a irapd vop.o- |>. 3c 
 administpa- Oerov fiaaiXea)? TrapaXafiovaa, Kpiveiv ei? eKelva 
 
 tion of ex- m , 9 v v 
 
 LBtinglawB? (JKGiTOvcra r« re olkoliol Taypevra eivai koli aoiKa, 
 TT\v avTrjs iSiav dperi-jv 7ra.peypp.evr1 tov p.i]6 vtto 
 
 hTLVO)V SwpWV pLl]0 y VTTO (f)6/3cDl> fJLTJT€ OLKTCOV pL7]6* 
 
 vtto TLV09 aAXrj? e^6pa9 ptr]8e (f)iXlas -qTrrjOelaa uapa c 
 tt)V tov vop.o6erov rd^iv edeXeiv av to. dXXrjXcov 
 iy/cXr/pcara Siaipelv ; 
 
 NE. 20. Ovk, dXXa crxeSou ocrov e'tprjKas, returns* 
 ioeoTt 7-779 SvvdpLeco? epyov. 
 
 Thisppwer, £E. }^ a \ T ^ v T £ v SlKa(TTG)l> apa pU>pLT/l> dvevp'i- 
 
 only the aKopLev ov fiao-iXiKrjv ovcrav dXXa vop.coi> (hvXaKa koll 
 
 guardian, f ' 
 
 and not the VTTrjpeTLV eKeiVT]^. 
 
 directress, 
 
 of the laws. NE. 20. ' Eoi/C6 ye. 
 
 The science f , , , f f , y 
 
 of govern- 15 ^E. Tooe o?; KaravorjTeov loovtl avvairaaa? TOL? 
 
 nient must , , ^ if rf , » ~ > ^ ^ 
 
 he different eiTl(TTr)p.aS CLl eipqVTOLl, OTl TToXlTLKT) ye aVTCOV OVOepUd 
 from all of , , , \ x v ■$ n , \ > » \ , 
 
 these. Her avecpavq. tt)v yap ovTws ovaav pacrcXiKr]u OVK aVTTjV d 
 
 business is^« / > . , » v ~ c» t ' 
 
 notimme- oet Trparreiu, aXX apyeiv T(£>v ovvapLevcov irpaTTeiv, 
 
 diate ac- / \ > r \ t \ ~ / 
 
 tion, but yiyvuto-Kovo-av tyjv apyrjv re /cat op\xr\v tcdv pLeyLcrrcov 
 
 the guid- > ~ / .. 1 / / v > / \ 
 
 ance of 20 w T a ^ 7ToA€0~iv eynaipias re irepi Kai aKaipias, ras 
 
 action w " \ \ % /\ ' s> " 
 
 through ° aAAa? ra Trpoo~TayUevTa bpav. 
 
 'Zfr NE. 20. "OpM,. 
 
 5. p^d' u7ro' rtvos aXX^? ey#p.] " Understanding, as regards 
 
 " No, nor yet hatred ;" accord- fitness and unfitness of times, 
 
 ing to the well-known Platonic the beginning and first im- 
 
 idiom. Cf. supr. 298 d : are pulse of what is most im- 
 
 tlvcov larpcop Kai Kvf5epvr)T<i>v e'ir portant in states." Cf. Rep. 
 
 aXXcov Idicorwv. 4, 424 a : jroXtreia iav airag 
 
 9. <rxe86v — epyoi/] " You 6pp,rjarj fv. 
 
 have fairly expressed the limits 20. ras 8' oAXas] Supr. 
 
 within which this power is ex- 277 d: to'is S' «XXots Sia x ei P- 
 
 ercised." ovpyicov. So, very frequently, 
 
 17. ovk airfjv Set npciTTeiv, aXX' the obverse of a proposition 
 
 apxeiv] Cf. supr. 259 c. is stated at the close of a 
 
 19. yiyvacrKovcrav — TroXe'criv] sentence. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 173 
 
 505. 3*E. Aia ravra apa, «? p.ev apri 8LeXiiXv0apev, 
 
 tccanons, 
 md of the 
 
 ovre dXXrjXcov ovQ' avrcov apyovaai, irepi 8e riva Brat begin 
 
 ,*/ r- T ,/ „ y nn,(j,/ ninga of 
 
 Loiav avTrjs ovaa eKacrrr) irpatjiv, Kara tijv LOtuTrjra great 
 
 TCOV 7rpdfJ6(OV TOVVOpa 8lKaiG)S e'lXrjtyeV l8lOV. The rest 
 
 NE. 20. E'/fao-J yovv. 5 aparfcicnlar 
 
 >— <TT' Ti^ ^ « / v \ function 
 
 Aili. 1^ oe iraawv re tovtcov ap^ovtrav kcci tcov and name: 
 
 t \o/ ^ \ 1 . , . / the work- 
 
 vopcov kgll ^vparavTcov tcov Kara ttoAlv e7r1p.eA0vp.e1/rju - mg f 
 
 v' h jl 1 »/i' " " " Btatesman- 
 
 kcci TravTCL £vvv(paivovo-av opooTara, rov kolvov ry Bhipisuni- 
 
 ■> ' \ rt ' v ^ ' • " versa] : ;unl 
 
 KArjo-eL irepiAapovTes rrju ovvap.Lv avTiqs, irpoaayo- hence thia 
 pevoipev diKaioTCLT av, &>? eoiKe, ttoXltiktjv. 10 sc " 
 
 NE. 20. YlavTouracri pev ovv. 
 
 SE. OltcoOj> 5?) /cat /cara to rrjs ixfiavTiKrjs irapa- 
 Secypa /3ouAo//xec9' av eire^eXOelv avTr)v vvv, ore koll 
 
 bears the 
 general 
 name of 
 govern- 
 
 Having 
 now distin- 
 
 udvTCL rd yevt] rd Kara ttoXlv 8r)Xa rjplv yeyovev ; ft Ulshe ti ** 
 
 forms of 
 
 NE. 20. Kgu a(j)68pa ye. 
 
 let us view 
 
 StE. Trjv 8r) fiatriAiK-qv avpurXoK-qv, cos eoiKe, 
 <jo6. XeKTeov iroia r earl koll tto'lco toottco avuirXeKOvaa h Y the 
 
 e * * light of our 
 
 7T0?0^ T^U^ V(f)acrp.a aTTo8i8cOCTlV. example. 
 
 NE. 20. AijXoV. the nature 
 
 „ of the web 
 
 SE. 'H xaXeirbv ev8elPaa0aL tt pay p.a dvayKahv^m which 
 
 v , » j / tms sove " 
 
 apa yeyovev, cos (paLverai. reign art 
 
 v ,— . r - r / \ f / inweaves 
 
 NE. 20. WavTcos ye p.r)v prjreov. all other 
 
 SE. To yap aperrjs pepos aperr}? e'l8eL 8id(f)opov 
 
 8. ^vvv(palvovo-av\ This word liriuikovuevr)v airdvTuiv tcov Kara 
 
 prepares the way for the return tt6\iv. For 7reptXa/3. cf. Theret. 
 
 to the example of weaving in 148 d : ravrns iro\\as ovo-as evi 
 
 what follows. ei'oVi mpieXa^es. 
 
 rov kolvov rfj Kkrjaei irepi- 1 3. civttjv] avrrj Bodl. All : 
 
 Xa/3oirf? ttjv hivafiiv avrrjs ] Cett. avrrjv. Cf. Legg. 6, 77^ C, 
 
 " Characterizing the function Phileb. 66 d. 
 
 of this art by the name of that ore — yeyove] Pp. 2 S 7-2 90, 
 
 which it shares with the rest," 303-305. 
 
 viz. that they are for the good 23. To yap — 8o'£as] " That 
 
 of the state. Sc. tto\ltik7)v, are one part of virtue is in some 
 
 arts '' 
 
174 nAATONOS: 
 
 The .in- di/ai riva Tpoirov toi? wept Xoyovs dp.(l)icr(3r)Ti]TiKols p. 30 ;: 
 
 involvesa koll ixaX eu€7rl0erop 7rpb? rds twv noXXcou 86£as. 
 
 difficult iv 
 
 question. NE. 20. Ol)/C k'paOov. 
 
 The parts M , , T , t f \ t t 
 
 of virtue aE. AAA woe ira\w. avftpeiav yap olp.ai (7€ 
 
 are gene- , „ , ,\ , , „ ? 
 
 rallj sup- 5 yyeiauai pepos ev aperr)? r)plv elvai. h 
 
 posed to l>c 
 in unison. 
 We must 
 now ex- 
 amine whe- 
 ther cou- 
 
 NE. 20. IlaW ye. 
 
 HE. Kal p.r)v (Tco(f)poavvrju ye dvSpelas p.ei> erepov, 
 
 €P $ OVV KOI TOVTO pLOpiOV Tj? KOLKeivO. 
 
 J3J? NE. 20. N«/. 
 
 ance are >— IT7 , rr\ ' S> v/ /i ' % ' » 
 
 not rather ro Ati. 1 OVTCOV 07] TTtpL VOLV{ia(TTOl> TIVOL KoyOV UTTO- 
 
 opposed. I / /i % / 
 
 (paiveaUai roXp.7]reov. 
 
 NE. 20. notoi/ ; 
 
 £7E. '12? i<TTbv Kara 8r) riva Tpoirov ev p.aXa 
 7rpos- dXXirjXas * ^Opoc * Kal ardatv ivavrlav eyovre 
 15 eV 7roAAoi9 rc3y ovtcov. 
 
 NE. 20. n^y Aeyew ; 
 
 SE. Ot)/c elcoOora Xoyov ov8ap.a>?' iravra yap 
 
 way different from another 8. ^s Kd»«<WJ Sc. aper^s. 
 
 kind of virtue is a position 14. a-rdaiv ivavriav] "Anop- 
 
 easily assailable by contentious posed attitude :" or perhaps, 
 
 disputants who appeal to com- crraa-iv evavriav e'xovre, " holding 
 
 mon opinion." opposite sides." For ey#pa the 
 
 (23.) operas fiepos dperrjs etSet] MSS. and Edd. have eytfpai/ : 
 
 The expression is purposely e'xovre C. H. : cett. ex eTOV - Cf. 
 
 varied, perhaps with the inten- Phaxlr. 238 a : bvo rive earov 
 
 tion of recalling the still Ull- I8ea apxovre Ka\ Syopre. 
 
 settled question of the distinc- 15. iv noXXo7s t£>v ovtcov] Cf. 
 
 tion between el8os and p-epos, illfr. C : e'lTe Kara (Toopara eire iv 
 
 SUpr. 263 a. Cf. Legg. 7,791 ^t^ats eire Kara (pcovrjs (popav, 
 
 C, where dvSpeia is called ^vx>js ew' avrwv tovtodv eiV iv elboAois 
 
 popiov dpeTrjs. lb. 3, 689 d : OVTCOV. 
 
 Charm. 1 60 a. The words from 1 7. iravra yap ovv — cpi\ia] The 
 
 rj YaAe7rw to 86gas are given to present is certainly a modifi- 
 
 the same speaker in the Bodl. cation of the view taken by 
 
 MS. Socrates in the Protagoras, 
 
 4. 'AAA' o>Se ttoIlv] Cf.Theset. where he upholds the simple 
 
 191b: aX\' a>8e. Rep. i. 352 e. unity of virtue. 
 Soph. 262 e : m^ 0-p.iKpbv rode. 
 
flOAITIKOS. 
 
 175 
 
 i |»o6. ovv <5?7 dXXr']Aoi? rd ye tyjs dperr/s fiopia Xeyerai 
 c 7rov (filXia. 
 
 NE. 2Q. Nat. 
 
 3?E. ^Koircopev 81) 7rpoaypvTe9 tov vovv ev pdXa, 
 ivorepov ovtcos dirXovv earl tovto, ?) iravros pLuXXov ■ 
 clvtcov e\ei Siacpopdv rols ijvyyeveaiv es ti ; 
 
 NE. SO. Nat, Xeyots dv tttj aKeirreov. 
 
 HE. 'E*> roi9 ^vpuraciL yjpr) (jjTeiv oaa KaXd ptev 
 Xeyopev, els Svo 5' avrd riQep.ev evavria dXXijXcav 
 e'lSr}. 
 
 NE. 20. Ae'y en. cracpearepov. 
 
 HE. 'OtjvTTjTa kcll rd)(OS, etre Kara acopara eire 
 
 d ev >\/vyai$ evre Kara (pcovrjs (popdv, eire avnov tovtcov 
 
 e\r ev eldcoXois ovtcdv, biroaa plovctlkt] pupovpevr) kcll 
 
 en ypa(f)iKr) pipjjpLara wape^erat, tovtcov tlvos enrai- 
 
 We mu t 
 loot E01 tin 
 amongst 
 ad ions 
 which we 
 admire, and 
 at the same 
 time con- 
 trast with 
 each other. 
 We praise 
 quickness 
 and bold- 
 ness on 
 many occa- 
 sions, and 
 always by 
 , applying 
 the same 
 epithet of 
 ' brave.' 
 
 5. ovtcos anXovp] Cf. Symp. 
 183 d : ovx an'hovv ecrrtv, — ovre 
 aaXov eivai qvto — ovre alcrxpov, 
 dWa Kcikcos fiev TrparTOfxevop KaXov, 
 alcrxpu>s 8e alcrxpov. 
 
 rj — ™] "Or whether there 
 be of them which differ in some 
 respect from their congeners." 
 The old editions had e'xov — earl, 
 which however is only found 
 in the margin of Ven. H, and 
 is probably due to iariv having 
 been read for is t\. Heindorf 
 COllj. e'xov e<TTL ti. But for av- 
 tqov without ti, cf. supr. 285 e, 
 and two. or arret is required 
 rather than n. 
 
 8. ocra — avTa] Cf. Soph. 
 225b: ocroi/ — a/x0icr/3r/reirai p.ev, 
 elufj 8e — 7Tfpt auTO 7rpdrrerat. 
 
 12. 'Oi-VTrjTa — j]0~dr]0~ai f] "I 
 
 mean to ask, have you ever 
 praised or heard others praise 
 
 any such thing as quickness and 
 speed, etc. 1" The constraction 
 is changed as the sentence pro- 
 ceeds, the accusative in d£. 
 Kai Tax- being partly due to 
 Xeye, and twos to the pi-evious 
 genitives. 
 
 ei're — ijcrdijcrai ] The first 
 two pairs of eire s are hy- 
 pothetical, and the third is 
 interrogative. " Whether you 
 have either yourself spoken 
 or heard others speak in com- 
 mendation of any of these 
 things — quickness and speed, 
 whether in body, or mind, or 
 movement of sound, whether 
 real, or in such shadowy forms 
 as music, and even painting, 
 afford by imitation." 
 
 ei're ev v/z^ais] Cf. Lcgg. 
 3, 689 d : TvavTa tc\ Kop-fya nai 
 Tvpbs tuxos ttjs yj/vx^s 7re0UKoVa. 
 
176 nAAT0NQ2 
 
 
 veTrjs etre aura? ttcottote yeyovus cure dXXov rrapow p. 3' 
 i.iratvovvro's no'OrjO'ai ; 
 
 NE. 20. Tt fjL7 F ; 
 
 SE. 'H /cat fjLi>r)fir]i> e^ty OVTiva Tpoirov avro 
 
 5 SpcoCTLJ/ Iv €K<X(JT019 TOUTCOf ; 
 
 NE. 20. OuSa/zeSy. 
 
 SE. 'A/o' ow 8vvarbs avro av yevoifirjv, (ocnrtp 
 /cat 8ia.voovp.ai, 81a Xoycov ivdelijao-Oal aoi ; 
 
 NE. 20. Tt <$' ov; e 
 
 10 SE. 'Pa<5to^ eot,K.as riyeiadai to tolovtov' o-kottw- 
 p.eda 8* out> auro eV rot? virevavTLOLS yeveari. tcov yap 
 8i] irpd^eu>v iv woXXals /cat ttoXXclkis eKacrroTe ra^os 
 Kal o-<po8poTr}Ta koi o^vttjto. 8iavor)aem re /cat cnop.a- 
 T09, €TL 8e Kal (f)coi>r]9, orav dyao-0a>p.ev, Xeyop.ev avro 
 ibtiraivovvTts pud xpcop.evoi irpocrprjaeL rfj rrjs avBpeias. 
 NE. 20. Urn ; 
 
 37E. 'Oijv /cat dv8pel6v ttov (f)ap.ev, Kal ra^v /cat 
 di>8piKov, /cat a(po8pbv waavrcos' /cat iravrcos im(J)6- 
 povres rovvopca b Xeya> koivov irdo-ais tols (pvaeat 
 20 ramais £iraivovp.€v avrds. 
 
 4. avro bpaxrC] Cf. Soph. ra>v yap 8tj — dvbpeias] "For 
 233 c: ApSo-t Se ye toOto npbs there are many actions in which, 
 ajravrd, cpapfu. and that repeatedly, we praise 
 
 5. eV sicdo-Tois tovtcov] " In speed and vehemence and quick - 
 the case of body, mind, voice, ness, mental and bodily; and 
 or imitative art." on each occasion" (erao-Tore) 
 
 7. wcnrep — 8iavoovp.at] Cf. "express our praise of the qua- 
 
 Crat. 435 b. lity which we admire by the 
 
 11. iv tols v-rrevavriois yeVecn] one appellation of ' bravery.' " 
 
 " In the kinds where the oppo- 12. iv iroXXal? na\ ttoXXokis ] 
 
 sition appears." Supr. c : ivavria Cf. Soph. 264 b: evia ko.\ more — 
 
 — ei'877. Qy. Tais uTrerarriais with which should bave been 
 
 yece'o-eo-i ? Cf. infr. : rjpepalas av compared Phileb. 32 d : ivlore 
 
 yeviarecos. 3IO 0.'. TroWals yeve- Ka\ evia — eo~riv ore . 
 
 o-eo-iv, where some MSS. have 14. avro] Sc. rdxos ko.\ o-cpo- 
 
 noWols yeveatv. dpoTrjra Ka\ o^vTrjTa k.t.X. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 177 
 
 ,06. NE. 20. Nat. 
 
 JE?E. Tt (V; 70 rrjs r)pep.alas av yeueaeoj? elftos dp 
 [07. ov 7roAAa/cfy eirrjveKap.ev ev TroAAaty twv 7rpd$jecov ; 
 
 NE. 20. Rat cr0do>a ye. 
 
 HE. Mc3y oui/ ou rdvavTia Xeyovre? ?) 7re/9t €/ce/- 
 yaw rouro (f)0eyyopLe6a ; 
 
 NE. 20. ricSy ; 
 
 HE. '0? rjavxaid ttov (fiapLev eKaarore kou a<o- 
 (j)povLKci, irepi re Sidvotav irpaTTopieva dyaaOevTes 
 kcu Kara rd? irpd^ets av (SpaSea /cat /uaAa/ca, /cat en 
 irepi (f)coi>d? yiyvop.eva Aeta kou jQapea, kou irdaav 
 pvOfiiKrjv Kivrjaiv kou oXyjv povaav ev Koupcp (3paSv- 
 h rrJTi 7rpocr)(pa>p,ei>i]v i ov to ttjs dvftpeias aAAa to Trjs 
 KOO-fJuoTijTo? ovopta eiTL^epopiev oivtoIs ^vpuraGLV. 
 
 NE. 20. 'AAT/foarara. 
 
 HE. Kat fir)i> birorav av ye dpttpoTepa ylyvrjTai 
 ravTa i)puv aKaipa, peTafiaXXovTes eKarepa avrwv \j/e- 
 yop.ev eVt TavavTia irdXiv dirovepiQVTes toIs bvopuacriv. 
 
 Again, 
 wc often 
 praise x<-i\~ 
 tlenesa and 
 q detail 
 of di mean 
 our and 
 movement , 
 and here 
 wc use the 
 very dif- 
 ferent epi- 
 thet of 
 
 ' modest.' 
 On the 
 other hand, 
 
 both bold- 
 nesa and 
 gentleness 
 are often 
 blamed, as 
 rash and 
 cowardly. 
 But rash- 
 ness and 
 
 . cowardice 
 are not 
 found toge- 
 ther, and 
 bravery 
 and mo- 
 desty have 
 not a natu- 
 
 2. yevecreoos] The word is 
 used in the same sense as supr. 
 283 d, 287 e, to express the 
 operation of any art, or, more 
 generally, the act of doing any- 
 thing. 
 
 8. c Oy rjcrvxala — £vfjLTra<riv ] 
 
 " In saying ' quiet and mode- 
 rate' on each occasion, as you 
 know we do (7tou), when we 
 admire what is done slowly 
 and softly either in thought 
 or action, or, again, what is 
 sounded smoothly and gravely, 
 and all rhythmical movement, 
 and every liberal exercise 
 which applies slowness at the 
 proper time. To all these we 
 attribute not bravery but so- 
 briety, as a fitting epithet." For 
 
 7r£s; answered by w, cf. Rep. 
 6, 510b; irfj 5 — J/ to peu avToii 
 k.tX Theak 172 d. For the 
 asyndeton, cf. supr. 293 b, 
 where vevop.iKap.ev is resumed 
 in (papev, as qbapev in irrt(pe- 
 
 pofiev here. 
 
 12. povo~av~\ Cf. Legg. 4, 
 722 d. 
 
 ev Kaipcf] Cf. illfr. e, dicac- 
 
 pOTCpOV OVTCL T) )(pi], and AllSt. 
 
 Eth. Nic. II. 2, Set 8' avrovs 
 
 del TOVS TTpClTTOVTClS TO. TTpuS TOV 
 
 Kaipbv (TKoneiv. 
 
 17. aKaipa] This reading is 
 found as a correction in E, 
 otherwise the MSS. unite in 
 
 giving aKepata. 
 
 18. €ttl TavavTia ndXiv anove- 
 povres rots ov6p.aaiv\ " Assigning 
 
 A a 
 
178 
 
 flAATONOS 
 
 rnJ affinity 
 For each 
 
 Doth these 
 diverse na- 
 tures aud 
 the indivi- 
 duals in 
 whom they 
 are found, 
 most often 
 Btand op- 
 ])osed and 
 are divided 
 by mutual 
 antipathy. 
 This play 
 of antipa- 
 thies is, 
 however, 
 a trifle in 
 comparison 
 of the mo- 
 mentous 
 issues to 
 
 NE. 213. llm ; 
 
 SE. 'O^urepa ucv aura, yiyvoatva tou Kcupov kcu 
 Oclttcd kcu aKk-qporepa (jyatvoueva [/cat] vfipurTiKa kcu 
 uaviKa Aeyovres, to. 8e (3pa8vrepa koll uaXrxKcorepa 
 5 SeiAa kcu /3Aa/a/ca'. kcu oyebov w? to ttoXu tolvtol 
 re kcu rrjv acoc^pova cfyvcriv kcu rrjv avhpiiav ttju tcoi/ 
 IvavTLoav, oiov ']"7roAe^/ay-j" SiaXaypvaas araatu iSear, 
 out ciAArjAcu? uiyvvuivas i(f)eupLO~Kou€i> eV rat? irepl 
 ra TOiavra 7rpdtjecTiv, en re rov? iv rah y^/v^cus 
 loavTas l(j)(0VTas dLCKpepouevovs aAA^Aot? 6\j/6u€0a, 
 iau ueradicoKcouev. 
 
 NE. 20. Uod St) Aeyw ; 
 
 HE. 'Ey iracri re 8rj tovtois oh vvv ehrofiev, cos 
 
 P-3 
 
 them to the opposite quarters 
 again in our nomenclature." 
 
 3. [ko.\] vj3picTTiKa\ So all the 
 MSS. except Ven. S. ml v(3p. 
 kcu fiav. = " Not only violent, 
 but mad." 
 
 vfipio-TiKa] Cf. Pheedr. 252 b: 
 
 vfBpKTTlKOV TTU.VV KOI OV 0~(ji68pa 
 
 ti epperpov. Cratyl. 426 b. 
 
 4. paviKa] Cf. Soph. 242 a: 
 
 pi] TTore aoL pai'iKus eivai 86£a> 
 napci 7768a peTa(3aXo>v ipavrbv uva) 
 Kal Kara). 
 
 5. (BXaKiKa] Cf. Eep. 4, 432 d : 
 (BXcikikov ye fjpav to irdBos. Gorg. 
 488 a : irdvv pe rjyuv /3X5ko effect. 
 
 Euthyd. 287 e : i^paprov 8u\ 
 
 rr)v fikaneiav, 
 
 kcu cr^eSof peTahi&>Ka>pev ] 
 
 " And so it is for the most part 
 that we find these (the harsh 
 and effeminate), and also the 
 temperance and manliness of 
 the characters opposed to them, 
 as ideas diametrically antago- 
 nistic, not mingling with each 
 other in the actions concerncd 
 
 Avith such things ; and, more- 
 over, we find, if Ave folloAv up 
 the quest so far, that the men 
 also of whose minds they are 
 attributes are at variance Avith 
 each other." dv8peiav is pro- 
 bably a substantive. 
 
 7. olov — Ideas] The Avords as 
 they stand must be construed 
 " As hostile forms having taken 
 different sides in a quarrel." 
 (SmX. or.) But I Avould venture 
 to read iroXeuacu', and translate 
 " Forms Avhich as it were have 
 severally been put in a hostile 
 attitude." Compare o-rdaiv 
 
 evavTiav eyoire SUpr. 306 b. 
 
 Alberti's interpretation, Avho 
 AVOllld join ttjv tu>v ivavriav 
 8iaX.axovo-as ardo-iv, oiov %o\e- 
 
 pias I8eas, - " participating, as 
 hostile forms, in the Avar of 
 opposites," Avill hardly com- 
 mend itself to scholars. He 
 is right, however, in adducing 
 Legg. 8, 836 d : to ttjs aaxppo- 
 vos ISeas yivos. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 179 
 
 \oj. cIko? re, Iv €T6poL9 noXXois. Kara yap ol/j.ai Ti]V 
 
 d avrcois eKarepois j-vyyivtiav rd /xeV tiraivovvrzs co? 
 
 oiKeia a(j)€Tepa, rd Se twv $ia(f)6p(av xj/f-yovres coy 
 
 dXXorpia, 7roX\rji> ei? tyOpav dXXr/Xois koll ttoXXwv 
 
 7T€pL KaO'tdTavTai. 5 
 
 NE. 20. Ku/Svvevovcriv. 
 
 £?E. Ilac8ia Toivvv avrr) ye' tls rj 8ia(f)opa tovtcdv 
 iarl twv eldcow 7rep\ de rd p,ey terra vocros ^vpifiaiveL 
 Tracrwv kyOiaTr) yiyveaOai reus TroXeaiv. 
 
 NE. 20. He pi Si) ttolol (j)rj$ ; i° 
 
 e HE. rie/n oXi]P, cos ye ekoy, rr)V rov £r}v irapa- 
 aKevrjv. ol p.lv yap di) $ia(f)€p6i>TQi? ovres Kocrp-ioi rov 
 rj<jv)(oi> del fiiov eroipoi (r)v, avrol Ka0* avrov? povoi 
 ra a(f)erep' avrcov 7rpa.TT0i>T€?, olkol re wpbs awavras 
 ovtcos bpiXovvres, /ecu irpbs rd$ e'ijcoOev 7roX€is oocrav- 15 
 
 which this 
 contrarii ty 
 leads. 
 
 For tho 
 lovers of a 
 quiet life, 
 if they have 
 their way, 
 by enerva- 
 ting them- 
 selves and 
 tlic youth, 
 will often 
 bring theii 
 country 
 into sla- 
 very. 
 
 2. cos oiKe'ia a<perepa^ " As 
 their own kith and kin." Stall- 
 baum quotes Demosth. Orat. c. 
 Callic. pp. 1274. 5, 1275. 7 : 
 fifierepov 'Idiov. Lucian. T. III. 
 p. 226 e, ed. Bipont. : rovpov 
 i'Stoi/. The Bodleian has icpirepa 
 ( sic )- 
 
 4. troWr/v — Ka\ noWcov 7re'pi] 
 Cf. ev ttoXXoij Kai 7ro\\dKts SUpr. 
 
 306 e. 
 
 7. naiSm] I. e. a trifling 
 matter. Cf. iEsch. Prom. 314. 
 
 ye rts] Qy. y 'in 1 
 
 8. c-vpftaivei] Sc. r; 8ia(j)opa 
 avT-q. Cf. Soph. 228 a. 
 
 11. ILrpi 6\t]v — S0OX01] " Em- 
 bracing, as might be antici- 
 pated, the whole arrangement 
 of life. For we knoAv that 
 those who excel in modesty 
 are always ready to lead a 
 quiet life, doing their own 
 
 business by themselves alone, 
 and while they live peaceably 
 with all at home, they are 
 likewise ready at all points to 
 be in a manner at peace with 
 foreign cities. And from being 
 thus in love with quietness, a 
 love not suited to their occa- 
 sions, they unconsciously be- 
 come unfit for war, and create 
 the same defect in their young 
 men, and are in the power of 
 the first aggressor, whence 
 ere many years have passed, 
 themselves, their children and 
 their whole community have 
 often, ere they were aware, 
 been reduced from freedom to 
 slavery." 
 
 12. ovres €TTiTi6epevcov\ Cf. 
 
 Soph. (Ed. Eex. 917 : a\X' ecm 
 
 rov Xeyovros. lb. Gild. Col. 
 756 : tovttlovtos apirdcrai. 
 
 A a 2 
 
And the 
 sort who 
 incline to 
 
 ISO IIAAT0NO2 
 
 reo? (Totfioi iravTa owes rplmov TLva dyuv elprjvyv. p. 3c 
 
 KCLL 8ia TOV €pO)Ta 8t) TOVTOV, UKaip<)T€f)OV OVTCL r) XPVi 
 
 qtolv a (3ovAoi>tcu 7rpaTTco(Tii>, tXaOov clvtol re uiro- 
 Xe/jLco? ta)(oi>T€9 koll tovs veovs oxravrcos 8iaTi0€VT€? 
 5 6We? re del twv €7rtTi.d€p.ei>coi>, tij d>v ovk Iv ttoXXols 
 €T€criu avTol Kai Troupes koll tjv/JLTraaa r\ ttoXis avr 
 eXevOepcov noXXaKis eXaQov civtovs yevop.evoL 8ovXol. p 30 
 NE. 20. XaXewov eiVe? koll 8eivhv iraOos. 
 SE. Tt 8' ol 77-/30? tt)v dv8peiav llolXXov piirovTVi ; 
 odp ovk hri iroXeLtov del Tiva ret? avrcov ^vvTeivovrts 
 everstir- woXets 81a tt)V tov TOLOvTou (3lov o~(po8poTepav rov 
 
 strffeand 8e0VT09 llTlQv\Xiav, €L9 6\dpav TToXXoh KCU 8vvCLT0LS 
 
 quarrels 15 /coa-aorayre?, 7] irdpurav 8i(aXeaav ?) 8ovXa? av Kai 
 MneSbT" VTToyeipiovs tols eyOpoh viriOeaav tols avrutu ira- 
 
 %? m °P NE. 20. "Ear, «* rccvra. _ b 
 
 opposite &E. riooy ouj> /x?) (pco/uLtv ev tovtol? d/xcfjorepa 
 
 ravra ra yevrj iroXXr/v irpos aXXrjXa del kou ttjv 
 fieylo-Trjv 'layetv eyOpav kou ordaiv ; 
 20 NE. 20. Ov8a/xco9 a>? ov (f)r)o-o/jL€i>. 
 
 HE. OlfKOVV 07T€p i7reO-K07TOV/JL€V kglt ap^a?, 
 dvevprjKafxev, on /xopia dperrjs ov apuKpd dXX-qXois 
 8ia(j)€pea6ov (pvaei Kai 8r) koll tow IcrypvTas 8pdjov 
 to avTo tovto ; 
 
 1. TTavra] Adverbial. 19. i'xdpnv kci\ a-rdaiv] Supr. 
 
 7. noWaKis — 8av\oi] Note 306 b. The writer seems to 
 
 the rhythm. The style of this pass almost unconsciously from 
 
 passage is closely similar to the one meaning of o-rdo-is to 
 
 that of the Laws. the other. 
 
 IO. %vvteivovT£S ] Cf. Rep. 20. OvSap.£>s ws ov] The 
 
 9, 590 b : otuv to Xeovrcodes — adverbial form of oidels 00-- 
 
 o-WTeivr)T(ii dvappdaTas. tis ov. 
 
 13. KaTaardvTes] Qy. KaraaTr)- 23. dparou to avro tovto] Sc 
 
 vavTes 1 noiovaiv 8u«ptpeiv. 
 
nOAITIKC)2. 
 
 181 
 
 308. 
 
 NE. 20. Kiv8vvev€Tov. 
 
 3?E. To5e tolvvv av Xd(3co/j.ev. 
 
 NE. 20. To two* ; 
 
 SE. El' r/ff 7rou ra>*> avvOeTiKcov ejriaTyjpcov 
 irpdypa otlovv tcov avTTJs epycov, kolv el to c/>gcuAo-5 
 toltov, (Kovcra t/c poyOrjpcov /cat xprjo-Tcov tlvcov £vvl- 
 arrjaLU, rj Trdaa emo-Tr)p.r] iravrayov tcl p.ev pLoyO^pd 
 els dvvapiv a7ro(3aXXei, tcl 8 e7riTr)8eia /cat xprjorTa 
 eXafiev, Ik tovtcov 8e /cat bpLOitov /cat dvopLoicov ovtcov, 
 
 f » a > \ > / / v s> ' v cast the bad 
 
 TtavTa eis ev avTa ^vvayovaa, puav Tiva 0vvap.1v /cat i° asvay .And 
 
 '?>' S ~ will nut the 
 
 ideav d^fiiovpyei. polilical 
 
 science, 
 then, com- 
 bine good 
 elements, 
 whether 
 like or un- 
 
 Now let us 
 
 ask whe- 
 ther any 
 .art 1 if com- 
 bination 
 will not 
 first select 
 good ele- 
 ments to 
 be com- 
 bined, and 
 
 NE. 20. Tifirjv; 
 
 HE. OvS 1 dpa r) kclto. fyvcnv dXyOais ovcra r)plv 
 d ttoXltlkt] pur) iroTe e/c xprjaTcov kou kolkcov dvOpcoircov 
 eKodcra eivai avaTrjarjTaL ttoXlv Tiva, dXX' ev'8rjXovis llk 
 otl 7rai8ia 7rpcoTov fiaaavie'i, peTtx 8e tx\v /3daavov av 
 toIs 8vvapevois 7rai.8eveiv K.a\ virr/peTelv npos tovt 
 avTO 7rapa8(oaei, 7rpoo~TaTTOvaa /cat hno~TaTovo~a 
 avTrj, KaOdirep vcpavTiKr/ toIs re tjalvovcri /cat tols 
 
 There can- 
 not be a 
 good com- 
 bination of 
 good and 
 bad. 
 
 And as the 
 weaver pre- 
 sides over 
 
 5. kclv ei] Cf. Soph. 247 d, 
 267 e ; Phileb. 58 c. 
 
 13. OuS' apa — eVto-rarft] "Nor 
 is it possible then that our 
 art of statesmanship, in the 
 true and natural sense, will 
 ever (if this can possibly be 
 avoided) form a city by the 
 combination of bad and good : 
 but she will clearly first test 
 her subjects by some child's- 
 play, after which she will en- 
 trust them to those who are 
 able to educate youth and to be 
 her ministers for this end: and 
 over these she will maintain 
 authority, just as the art of 
 weaving continually presides 
 
 over and directs the carders 
 and the rest who prepare what 
 is necessary for her use in the 
 production of her fabric." 
 
 1 4. £k XPT]<Tt£)V Kdl KCIKCOV ] 
 
 Contrast Thucyd. VI. 18 : to re 
 (pav\ov kol to picrov ku\ to ttuvv 
 dxpifies av £vyKpadev pakiuT uu 
 lo~xveiv. 
 
 1 6. 7rai8ta {3ao-avic'i] Cf. Pi ep. 
 
 3> 413 ; Legg. 1, 648; supr. 
 307 & 
 
 17. Koi VTTrjpeTe'iv npos tovt 
 
 avTo] Seeing that the art of 
 education also is ministerial to 
 the state. Cf. supr. 304. 
 
 19. Kadatrep vqbavTiKi]\ Supr. 
 p. 282. 
 
1 82 
 
 nAAT0N02 
 
 the prepa- 
 ratory pro- 
 cesses of 
 cardingand 
 Bpinning,80 
 this Bcience 
 will deliver 
 those whom 
 she selects 
 to educa- 
 tors, over 
 w hose work 
 she will 
 herself pre- 
 side. Those 
 incapable 
 of moral 
 training 
 she will 
 reject and 
 suppress. 
 Those of 
 an ignorant 
 and abject 
 nature she 
 will en- 
 slave. 
 The rest, 
 who are 
 capable 
 of being 
 moulded 
 to a noble 
 type and 
 drawn 
 into har- 
 mony, she 
 
 rdXXa 7rpcnrapa(TKtva.(<)V(Tiv ocra irpos tijv irXtfyv p. 30 >' 
 avrrj?, ijv/x7rapaKuXov0uvcra irpoaTwrTti koll briara- 
 re?, roiavra tKaarois ivBeiKvvaa tu epya dnore- e 
 AetV, ola av eTrmjSeia rjyrjrai irpos rrjv avrrjs eivat 
 5 ^vpirXoK-qv. 
 
 NE. 20. Ylavv p.lv ovi>. 
 
 SE. Tolvtov 8r/ llol rovO' rj fiaaLXiKr] (fjalisercu 
 iraai tols Kara vollov 7rou8evTca? koll Tpofevai, ttjv 
 tyjs iTTicrTCLTLKr}? avrrj 8vi>cl/jllv e')(OV(Ta, ovk hriTp&fy&v 
 
 lod(TK€?l> O TL LIT} TLS TTpOS T7]V OLVTYjS j~vyKpO.O~LV d.7T€p- 
 
 ya{p/jL€vos rjOos tl irpiirov dwoTeXei, tolvtol 8e p.ova 
 7rapaKe\euea0a.L 7rai8eveii>. koll tovs pev per) 8vva- 
 pLtvovs Koivcovelv rfOovs dvSpelov koll aaxfipovos oaa 
 re aXXa earl reivovra irpos dper-qv, dXK els d6eo- 
 
 l5Tr)T0L KOLL vfiplV KOLL d$LKLOLV VTTO KaKYjS (3la (f)Va€0)S p. 309 
 
 ^diroiOovptvovs*) Oolvcltols re ck^olXXel koll (fivyals 
 
 KOLL TOLLS p.eyl(TTOLLS KoXatfiVCTOL aTLpLLaLS. 
 
 NE. 20. Ae'yeroLL yovv itcds ovtcos. 
 
 SE. Tovs 5' kv dpiaOla r av koll T<mavoTr)Ti 
 
 7. Talrov 877 tovQ' 1 '] "Precisely 
 in the same manner it appears 
 to me that the kingly art, 
 keeping the presidential office 
 in her own hands, will not 
 permit those who are educat- 
 ing and rearing the young 
 under the law to practise 
 them in aught but that which 
 being wrought with a view to 
 her process of commingling, 
 creates a disposition suitable 
 thereto, but in these things 
 only she exhorts them to edu- 
 cate the young." 
 
 Tavrbv — tovto ] Cogn. ace. 
 in apposition with what fol- 
 lows 
 
 ravrov 87 kci\ rbv t:oit)tlkov 6 
 6p66s vofioderrjs k.t.A. 
 
 15. vtvo Kaiajs /3ia (jivaeas] 
 
 Note the inverted order. 
 
 1 6. * dirodovfievovs * ] Par. H. 
 enradovfjievos : cett. dncodovfieva. 
 
 The correction is Stallbaum's. 
 The MS. reading requires dX\' 
 
 oaa. I. e. 8vvap.evovs KOivavelv 
 
 tovtwv oaa. But the neuter 
 may be defended by supplying 
 f/67], as implied in tovs bwafxi- 
 
 vovs KOLvavelv rjdovs. 
 
 17. KoXdfrvaa] There is a 
 sort of zeugma here. Only 
 a part of the sense of eK/3aAAet 
 is to be repeated with the 
 participle. 
 
nOMTIKOS. 183 
 
 309. TroXXfj KvXLvbovpevovs els to SovXlkoi> VTTotj-vyvvai will weave 
 , together in 
 
 ytVQS. the follow- 
 
 NE. 20. 'OpOoTOLTOL. taking the 
 
 hti t* v -v > > <" ' j ' » n ^ brav< oa- 
 
 AUt. LOV? A017TOV9 TOLVVV, OCTUiV OLL (pVO~€LS C7Ti TO turea for 
 \ <> r ' n > -the warp 
 
 yevvaiov iKavai iraiotias Tvyyavovaai Kauio-Taavai 5 and the 
 
 gentle for 
 
 «$■> the Boftei 
 
 woof. 
 As nature 
 directs, she 
 will bind 
 
 b koll SeijaaOai peTtx T&vyrjs (-vfifiictv irpos a A At; A 
 
 TOVTCOV TOL9 p€V €7TL TT]V OLvbpeLOLV paXXoV ^VVTtLVOV- 
 
 crar, oiov crTi]noi>o<pve? voplaaa auTtou dvai to 
 
 v T/j \pv\>\\/ // v the iminor- 
 
 aTepeov rjuos, tols oe em to Kocrpiov iriovi re /cat t;ll t in 
 paXaKw koll kcltol ti)v eiKova KpoKcodei * diainj/juzTi* i t( 
 7rpoaxpcopevas, kvavTia 5e Teivovaas aXXrjXcus, iru- 
 parai TOiovde tlvol Tpoirov ^vvbtiv koll ^vpirXeKtLV. 
 
 NE. 20. Uolov hi ; Rightopin- 
 
 ' ' ion of what 
 
 c 37E. Ylp(OT0v pev kcltol to ^vyyeves to aeLytvls 
 bv Trj? "fyvyfjs avT(ov ptpos Oelco ^vvappoaapevrj 
 
 bond, and 
 the animal 
 part by 
 human ties. 
 
 is noble, 
 just, and 
 good, when 
 confirmed 
 SeO-pW, peTCL <5e TO OflOV TO tjooytvh CLVTCOV avOtS by reason 
 
 avOpcoirivoLs. ** a d . ivirie 
 
 principle in 
 NE. 20. 11(0? TOVT el7T€? OLV ; a godlike 
 
 \ ~ t f v form. 
 
 SE. Tyv tcov kolXcdv koll Slkolloiv irepL koll ay a- The good 
 
 lawgiver 
 
 I. v7ro£evyvv(ri\ Sc. rols ak- depart. Cf. 8t,av6i^a>. Corrected 
 
 Xoir, " makes subject to the by Cornarius. 
 
 rest." 14. Ilpcorov — dvdpcoTriuon ] 
 
 7. ray pev hri — ^vfinXe- " First harmonizing that part 
 
 Kuv~\ " Some natures tending of their soul which is of eter- 
 
 more to courage, whose hard nal origin with a kindred, 
 
 quality she compares to that that is a divine bond; and, 
 
 of the warp, while others are after that which is divine, the 
 
 disposed to gentleness, as if animal nature again with hu- 
 
 spun thick and soft and, ac- man bonds." For the fooyeves 
 
 cording to the image, in the pepos ttjs ^vxns, cf. Tim. 69 c, 
 
 manner of the woof, these op- sqq. 
 
 posite tendencies she tries to 15. 6eia — dvdpconlvois] Cf. 
 
 bind aud weave together in Legg. 1,631b: SinXd 8e dyaffd 
 
 the following way." icrri, rd pev dvdpcaniva, rd be 
 
 gvvreivovcras] Neut. Cf. Slipr. flela' fjpTT)Tai 8° £k tcov Beiav 
 
 294 b. dare pa. 
 I O. * 8iavi']pciTi *] MSS. 8iav- 
 
184 nAATONOS 
 
 Bhould Ool)V KCtl TCOV TOVTOl? (VUVTICOV OVTOi? OVtTGLV dXflOn X). 20 S°9 
 alone be v , , , „ , , 
 
 able to im- ootjav fiera (3€J3a.icoar€oo?, ottotolv iv yl/vyrus eyy'iyvrj- 
 part tliis , v , f t , 
 
 iv educa- r«f, ^/efa^ r/)j;/zt ei> daipovico yiyveaOat yevei. 
 
 tion In the v/-v / l v 
 
 natureBCa- NE. 20. rT/0€7Tet yOW OUrwy. 
 
 pableofit. ,_ _ v N v v N , v 
 
 Til.- ciieet 5 A^. 1 oj/ o?) ttoXltlkov koll tuv uyaaov VOp.0- (I 
 
 of this ia , 9 , „ f , , , . 
 
 to soften oeTiiv ap lapev otl irpoarjKtL povov Ovvutov 
 
 the brave , „„ , ,v, 
 
 nature, eivai tyj T119 paaiAiKij? povarj tovto avro epTroiav 
 
 lighten the tok opOtos fjL€Ta\a(3ov(Ji 7rGu6Vay, oi)y iAtyopev 
 
 gentle. „ » . 
 
 vvv or) ; 
 IO NE. 20. To yow ef/cos 1 . 
 
 HE. ' Os 5' a^ fyjaf ye, w Sw/cpares-, d8vva.Tr] to 
 toiovtov, fxi]8e7TOTe toIs vvv ftjTovpevois ovopaaiv 
 avrov 7rpoo-ayopevco/i€v. 
 NE. 20. 'OpdoTara. 
 15 HE. TV ow ; dvSpeia yj/v^r) Xap/Savopevrj tt}? 
 TOiavrrjS dXr/0eia? dp* ov^ rjpepovTai koll tcov Sikclloov 
 fidXiara outgo KOivooveiv dv iOeXr/aete, pr) peTaXa- e 
 /3oDcra Se diroKXivei pdXXov 7rpos OrjpiooSr) tlvol 
 (pvaiv ; 
 2 o NE. 20. FIw? 5' ov ; 
 
 HE. T7 oY ; to tyj? Koaplas (pvcreco? dp ov tov- 
 tcov p\v p.€TaXa(3bv tcov dotjoov ovtgos o-co(ppov kcu 
 
 I. ovTas — /3e/3«iaxrecoy] "Real 913 c: KT>]pa dvrl KTi'jparos apei- 
 
 true opinion with confirma- vov iv dpdvovt Knjo-dpevos, 8ikt]v 
 
 tion : " i. e. knowledge, as de- iv rfj -tyvxrj ttKqvtov 7rpoTipr)- 
 
 fined in Theset. sub. fin. and o-a?. 
 
 Meno 98 a, b ; Phaxlo 76 ; 7. povo-rj] Cf. Rep. 6, 499 
 
 Tim. 51 d, e ; Legg. 2, 653 b. d : avrrj 17 povaa. This use is 
 
 3. 8aifiovi<p yevei ] Sc. rw frequent in the Laws. 
 
 tu>v ^/vx^v : which is at least 1 2. 7-oTs vvv foTuvfiivois 6v6fia- 
 
 Heaven-born, if not Divine. <riv~\ ttuKitlkos, (3aai\iKos, @a- 
 
 Cf. Kara to (rvyyePes supr. <ti\cvs. 
 
 Legg. I, 644 b : w? irparuv Tav 15. avhpeia — (pvaivj Cf. Rep. 
 
 KciWiaTcov tois dpiOTOLS dv- 3,410,411. 
 dpdcri 7rapa.y1yv6p.tvov. lb. 1 1, 
 
H0AITIK02. 
 
 is. 
 
 p.! 09. (f)pbvLp.ov, Ss ye iv 7ro\iT€ia, yiyverai, /x/j KOLvcovrj- 
 aav 8e cov Xeyop.ev iirove^Larbv riva evrjQtLus 8i«aio- 
 Tara Xafxfidvei (jjypyv ; 
 
 NE. 2D. Yldvv pev ovv. 
 
 AE. Ovkovv ^vpjrXoKrjv koll Secrpov tovtov rots* 
 fi€u KOLKOi? 7rpbs a(f)a? avTovs koll rots* dyaOols irpbs 
 tov? kclkov? p.r]8eiTOTe 1x.bvLp.0v (ficopev ylyvecrdai, 
 pir]de riva e7ri(TTr)p.T]v avTco cnrovbfi irpos tov? tolov- 
 tovs olv yjpy](j6ai irore ; 
 
 NE. 20. Ylm ydp ; 
 
 S*E. TW 8' evyeveo-L yevopte'vois re e£ dp\rj9 
 fjOecn OpecpOeicri re Kara (fivaiv p.bvoL9 8lol vbpcoov 
 
 €/X(f)V€0~(9ai, KOLL eVt T0VT0L9 8t] TOUT elvOLL T€)(VT) 
 
 <pdpp.aKOv, Kai, KaOdrrep eiiropLev, tovtov deLOTarov 
 elvai tov ^vv8eapov dpeTrj? p.epcov *0wr€A* dvop.olcov 
 /cat eVn rdvavrla (j)epop.evoiV. 
 
 U il, 1 di 
 vine bond 
 be once baa 
 po ed, the 
 human 
 links are 
 1 :i ily fas- 
 tened. 
 
 5 These are 
 the laws of 
 intermar- 
 riage and 
 union for 
 tliu sake of 
 offspring. 
 The com- 
 mon prac- 
 tice is erro- 
 neous with 
 respect to 
 this. 
 Not to 
 mention 
 alliances 
 for the sake 
 of wealth 
 and power, 
 
 , 5 in caring 
 for family 
 connexion, 
 men act 
 
 1. cos ye ev irokiTeiq ] 111 
 which it is not possible fully 
 to embody the highest wisdom. 
 Cf. Rep. 4, 430 c : ttoXu-ikj^ 
 ye (avBpeiav). 
 
 2. evrjdelas] Cf. Rep. I, 349b, 
 
 3, 409 a. 
 
 5. tovtov, SC. tov 7roA.iriKoV] 
 
 " Must we not then say that 
 the social bond can never 
 become lasting either amongst 
 bad men or between the bad 
 and the good : nor would any 
 science ever seriously make 
 use of such a bond in relation 
 to such materials as these?" 
 Qu. an leg. toiovtov 1 
 
 to7s fiev KaKols — dyadols ] 
 The datives depend on yiyve- 
 o-0ai fiovt/jiov. 
 
 1 1 . Tots' 6° evyeveat — (pepop,e- 
 va>v\ Sc. (pafiev. " But in those 
 characters which are at once 
 
 noble in their first origin, 
 and have been reared accord- 
 ingly, in these alone this har- 
 mony grows up when fostered 
 by the laws, and this medi- 
 cine is scientifically destined 
 for them ; and, as we have 
 said, this is the diviner bond, 
 uniting parts of virtue by 
 nature dissimilar, and diversely 
 bent." 
 
 re] MSS. ye. 
 
 13. tovtois] TheBodl. MS. 
 has tovtovs with An. 
 
 14. deioTaTov] So the Bodl. 
 MS., with AsnsY. Vulg. 
 
 -Tepov. 
 
 15. * cpvaei *] The conj. of 
 Stephanus for the MS. reading 
 cpvaecos. The expression dp<rr?)s 
 — (pvo-ems, though at first sight 
 resembling Soph. 258 b (dare- 
 pov popiov oiiVews), is less de- 
 
 B b 
 
186 
 
 FIAAT0NO2 
 
 on a wrong 
 principle, 
 aiming 
 chiefly at 
 
 I'M '.- Ill 
 
 ease, and 
 
 at consort- 
 ing with 
 
 their likes. 
 
 NE. 20. 'AA^cVcrrara. p 
 
 HE. TOW fJLTjV XOLTTOV?, OVTOLS dvdpOmil'OV? 8eCT- 
 
 fiov?, virapypvTOs tovtov tov Oeiov (r^eSbv ovdev ^a- 
 Xeirbv ovre ivvotlv ovre evvorjcravTa diroTtXeiv. 
 5 NE. 20. II coy Sr), kgu rivets ; 1 
 
 HE. Touy tcov kiriyapLichv kou 7ral8cov KOivtovrjcrecov 
 koll tcov irepl ray idla? 6k86(T€1? koll ydfiou?. o'l yap 
 ttoXXoi rd irep\ ravra ovk 6p6m ijvvdovvTat 7rpos 
 tt]v tcov 7rai8oov yevvqatv. 
 io NE. 20. 17 h-q ; 
 
 HE. Ta /xev ttXovtov koll Swdfiecov ev roty tolov- 
 tois Sicoyixara ri koll ny dv coy aljia Xoyov cnrovddtpi 
 fi€/jL(f)6/jLevof ; 
 
 NE. 20. OuSev. 
 l 5 HE. M.aXXov 8e ye dUaiov tcov irep\ Ta yevrj 
 
 , 
 
 fensible. Virtue was too fami- 
 liar an abstraction to be thus 
 paraphrased. And the reading 
 4>vareais may easily have slipt 
 in from supr. Koo-p.ias cpvaeoos. 
 Cf. SUpr. 308 b : popia dpeTTJs 
 ov crp.iK.pa dWrjXots diatpepeadov 
 (pixrei. 
 
 6. e7Tiyap,iwv — Koivoovrjcrc-cdv ] 
 " Intermarriages, and giving 
 and taking of children in mar- 
 riage between states." The 
 
 Koivcovia tcov naibcov is not to be 
 thought of here. 
 
 8. £w§ovvTai\ Eather mid- 
 dle voice with reciprocal mean- 
 ing than passive : = " enter into 
 mutual bonds." 
 
 12. biaypara ] Cf. Aesch. 
 Eum. 136. 
 
 15. nepl ra yevrj] "About good 
 family connexions." Stallbaum 
 objects that what follows re- 
 lates to individual character 
 
 and not to birth, and suggests 
 fjdr). But the transition from 
 wealth to birth is so natural, 
 that Plato here applies the 
 latter notion metaphorically, 
 which is so much the easier 
 as the bold and gentle cha- 
 racters are spoken of as yevrj, 
 and as the argument requires 
 them to be viewed as here- 
 ditary. " People at present 
 are too clannish in their alli- 
 ances : the brave seeks union 
 with the brave, the gentle with 
 the gentle race." Cf. supr. a : 
 
 rols evyevecri yevopevois. And in- 
 fra : to 7Tep\ tx]v dvhpelav yevos — 
 dpcporepa ra. yevrj. Also Legg. 3, 
 691 e : TJj Kara yevos aiidadel 
 
 pa>p.y. This idea does not 
 seem to be present in Tim. 
 18 e : oncos 01 kcikoI x^pis °' T * 
 dya8o\ Tciis opolais eKarepoi £v\- 
 
 \i]goi>Tai. But then in the Re- 
 
II0AITIK02. 
 
 187 
 
 jio. 7roLOvp.evtav eiripeXeiav, tovtcov irepi Xeyeiv, el tl p.r/ 
 c /caret Tpoirov tt pan ovo tv. 
 NE. 20. Ei/coy yap ovv. 
 
 HE. YipdrTOvcn p.ev Sr) ovde i£ evb? 6p6ov Xoyov, 
 rrjv ev tco 7rapa\prjpa dicoKOvre? paaTcovrjv Kai tco •■ 
 rov9 p.ev irpocropoLovs avTois dairo^eaOaL, tovs <$' 
 avopoiov? pi] <TT€pyeii>, irXelcrTOv rfj Svo-x^pela pepos 
 chrovepovTes. 
 
 NE. 2ft. Um ; 
 
 HE. Ot pev ttov KoapLioL to crcfieTepov avrcov ?)6o$ 
 
 tflrovcri, kol Kara bvvapav yapoval re irapa tovtcov 
 
 d /cat tol9 eKdtSope'va? irap avrcov el? tovtov? eKirep.- 
 
 ttovctl iraXiv' coy <5' avTcos to irep\ ttjv dvhpeiav yevos 
 
 i Thus the 
 sober inter- 
 marry with 
 the sober, 
 the bold 
 ■with the 
 bold. But 
 they ought 
 
 public and the opening of the 
 Timseus it is assumed that in 
 each individual the active and 
 philosophic tempers are com- 
 bined. In the Laws the harder 
 natures are chosen for the 
 highest offices, Legg. 5, 734 e : 
 
 Kaddnep ovv 8tj Tiva ^vvvcprjv rj 
 ■jrXeyp! aXX' otiovv, ovk e'< tcov 
 avrcov oiov r c'otI tt]V t ecpvcprjv 
 Kai tov o-Trjpova dnepyd^eaBai, 
 bia<pepeiv S' dvaymlov to ra>v 
 CTrjpovav irpbs dpeTijv yevos' lo~xv- 
 pov re yap Kai riva (HeftaioTTjTa iv 
 tois rpoirois elX^cpos' to 8e paXa- 
 Kcorepov kcu emetKeta tlv\ 8tKaia 
 Xpmpevov" odev br) tovs peydXas 
 dpxas iv rats iroXeo-iv cipi-ovras 
 bel bLaKpiveo-6ai riva rpdnov Tavrij 
 Kai tovs o-piKpa Tvai8eia (3ao~avL- 
 crde'vTas eKacrTOTe KaTa Xoyov. Cf. 
 Arist. Pol. I. 3 : (pi]crl yap 8eiv 
 a>o~nep e£ eTepov to o~Ti]pdviov 
 epiov yiverai ttjs KpoKrjs, ovtco Kai 
 tovs apxovTas exetv 8elv Trpos tovs 
 dp^opevovs. The same mixture 
 of natures, however, is required 
 in the other citizens, Legg. 6, 
 
 773 c • Tavra S17 81a Xoyov pev 
 vopco irpoo-TaTTeiv prj yapelv nXov- 
 criov nXovcriov pr]8e TroXXd 8vvd- 
 pevov npaTTeiv aXXov tolovtov, 
 BaTTOvs 8e rjBeai Trpos (3pabvTe- 
 povs Kai (3pa8vTe'povs irpbs Quttovs 
 dvayKa^eiv ttj tcov ydpav Koivcovia 
 TTopeveadat, npos t<5 yeXola elvaL 
 Bvpov av iyeipai ttoXXoIs' ov yap 
 pa8iov ivvoelv oti ttoXiv eivai 
 Set 8[kt)V KpaTTjpos KeKpapevqv, ov 
 pawopevos pev oivos eyKexvpevos 
 ^€i, KoXa£6pevos be vno vrjcpovros 
 eTepov 6eov KaX?]v Koivwvlav Xaftcov 
 ayaObv Trapa Kai perpiov direpyd- 
 
 ferat. Compare also the com- 
 bination of qualities required 
 for the guardian in Eep. 2, 
 and for the philosopher in 
 Rep. 6 and the Thea?tetus. 
 
 5. ttjv — o-Tepyeiv ] There 
 is a change of construction 
 from the participial form to 
 the dative of the manner. 
 
 7. TrXelo-Tov — dnovepovTes] 
 " Giving far more importance 
 to their dislike than to any 
 other consideration." 
 
 b 2 
 
lcSS 
 
 IIAATONOI 
 
 Spa, ri]v aurov perahicaKOV (f)uaii>, 8eov iroLeiv dp(f)o- p. $l(\] { 
 repa to. yevi] tovtcov tovvclvt'lov airav. 
 
 NE. 20. ricoy, kol Stu tl; 
 
 SE. Aiotl irtyvKtv dvSpela re eV 7roXXais yeve- 
 5 crecr^ apiKTo? yevucopevrj acotypovL (frvcrei Kara fxtv 
 ap^as aKpa^ELv pcofirj, reXevTuxra Se l^avQelv iravTa- 
 iraaL pLavious. 
 
 NE. 20. Wlkos. 
 
 SE. r H 8e oddovs ye av Xlav 7rXr)pr)9 yj/vx^ K.ai 
 io uKepaaros toA/at)? dvSpelas, im Se yeveas 7roXXa? e 
 our&> yevvYjOeicra, ucoOearepa (f)ve<j6ai rod Koupov kol 
 diroreXevrwaa brj Travrcmacnv avairrjpovaOaL. 
 
 NE. 20. Kat tovto eiKO? ovrco ijupfiaiveiv. 
 
 HE. Tovtovs Sr) tovs decrptov? eXeyov otl \aXe- 
 
 i5 7rov ovdeu fjvvdeiv virdp^avros rov 7repi ra /caAa 
 
 kolI dyaOd plav Zy£ iV dpfporepa rd yevq dotjav. 
 
 5. aaxfipovL (pvaeij apturos is 
 
 to be joined by hyperbaton to 
 
 o~a>(ppovL (pvo~ei. 
 
 6, i^avOelv — fiaviais~\ Tragic. 
 Cf. Soph. Ant. : ovto) rus pavias 
 Beivov aTToura^ei av8r)pov re fievos, 
 Kflvos eVe'yi/o) paviais K.t.X. Aescb. 
 Pei'S. 821 : vfipis yap e^avOova' 
 iKapnao-e trrdxyv cittjs. The 
 
 dative p.aviais occurs with simi- 
 lar meaning in Legg. 9, 869 a, 
 ib. 881 b, ib. 6,783 a. 
 
 9. 'H Be K.r.A.] Sc. 7re(pVKe. 
 
 alBovs ye] Bodl. re. 
 
 II. vu>B. rov K.J I.e. a.Ka'ipa>s 
 vcodrjs. Cf. SUpr. 276 e : evrjOe- 
 arepa rov Biovros. 308 a. 
 
 14. Tovtovs Br] — eiriTpeneiu'] 
 
 " It was of these bonds I said 
 that there would be no diffi- 
 culty in creating them, if only 
 both the kinds were first im- 
 
 bued with one opinion respect- 
 ing what is honourable and 
 good. Yes, this is the single 
 work in which the whole pro- 
 cess of the royal weaving is 
 comprised, never to allow tem- 
 perate natures to keep aloof 
 from the brave, but, warping 
 them together by common sen- 
 timents, by honours, by repu- 
 tation, and by interchange of 
 pledges, to form of both a 
 smooth and closely-woven web, 
 and then to give into their 
 hands the offices of state." Cf. 
 supr. 310 a, b. Rep. 4, 429 c : 
 
 Bid. TravTOs B' eXeyov avrr)v cra>- 
 rrjpiav to — Biaaa>£eo-dai ovttjv 
 
 K.T.X. 
 
 15- £vv8elv vtt.] Bodl. ijvuvw., 
 
 not gvvBeiv £vwTT. (Stallb.) 
 16 kci\ dyaBa] Bodl. KayaQa. 
 
nOAITIKOS. 
 
 189 
 
 310. tovto yap ev koll oXov earl fiacriXiKr}? tjvvvtyavaea)? 
 epyov, prj8eiroTe eav atyiaTaadai au>(f)pova diro twv 
 dv8pelcov ijOrj, IjvyKepKitpvTa 8e bpodoijlcu? kcu TipaTs 
 koll 86^ais koll bpr/peicov eK.86aeo~iv els dXXrjXovs, 
 
 of truth 
 and right. 
 
 Com! 
 these tw 
 kinds by 
 
 every avail- 
 able in- 
 » ~ \ \ » / c./ fluonce of 
 
 311. XeLOV KCU TO Xeyop.6VOV eV7]TpiOV VCpaapa ^VVayOVTUS opinionand 
 
 custom, the 
 kingly art 
 will dele- 
 gate all 
 offices of 
 state to 
 their joint 
 rule, where 
 
 ejj avTcov, rds ev reus noXeaiv dpyas del KOivf) tov- 
 tol9 iiriTpeireiv. 
 
 NE. 20. n«y ; 
 
 HE. Ov pev dv evbs apypvros \peia ijvpfialvr), 
 tov Tama dpL(f)6repa e^ovTa alpovp.evov e7rio~TaTr)V io[^ e ° de C j r 
 
 OV ft dl> TrXeiOVCOV, TOVTCOV p.epOS eKaTepcOV £vppi- fa^fo*** 
 
 yvvvra. tcl pev yap aco(j)p6viov dpyovTwv rjdr) cr(j)6- j^'J^ 
 Spa pev evXafirj Kal SiKaia Ka\ crcoTrjpia, 8pLp.vTT)T0? ta f es ' and 
 Be Kal tivos lrap.6rr]T09 bj^eias Ka\ TrpaKTU<r)$ ev- there are 
 
 8uTCU, 
 
 NE. 20. AoKel yovv 8rj Ka\ rdde. 
 h aE. Ta 8 dvSpela ye av rrpos pev to 8iKaiov Kal 
 
 evXafies eKelvcov eiriSeecrTepa, to 8' ev Tais Trpd^eai energy and 
 ^to ptevf 8ia<pep6vTC09 tercet. irdvTa 8e KaXws ylyve- 
 
 leeting 
 equally 
 from both, 
 that the 
 state may 
 act with 
 
 3. gvyK.epKi£opTa ] "Making 
 the web close." Vid. supr. 
 note on 282 b. 
 
 4. SfXTjpeicov] "Pledges." The 
 word occurs in Thucyd. VIII. 
 45 '. Tas vavs ano'keiiruiO'iv vttu- 
 XnrovTes es oprjpeiav tov npocro- 
 (peikopevov p.io~6ov. 
 
 5. evfjTpiov] " Of an even or 
 close texture." The opposite 
 is implied in Phsedr. 268 a : 
 
 el ctpa Kal o~o\ cpaiveTai 8ie- 
 
 (JTTjKOS CIVTCOV TO T/TptOV COCTTTep 
 
 epoi. 
 
 12. Ta pev yap — ev8e'iTai] "For 
 
 the character of a temperate 
 ruler is very careful and just 
 and safe, but is lacking in 
 
 thoroughness, and in a certain 
 prompt and active determina- 
 tion." 
 
 14. tra/xoVqros] The abstract 
 noun occurs only here. For 
 Irapos cf. Legg. 6, 773 b, and 
 for 'irqs Prot. 349 e. 
 
 18. eniSeeo-repa ] So Bodl. 
 with AH. cett. eTTtBeeo-Tepa. 
 
 to — ev Tais irpd£eo-i = to npaK- 
 
 tlkov. But see next note. 
 
 19. fro p-evf] "This, as op- 
 posed to the former." Cf. Soph. 
 
 252 d : tovto pev oios re Kuyco 
 Biakveiv. to pev SC to dvSpelov 
 
 rjdos. The change from plural 
 to singular is noticeable, but 
 seems to be required by dpcpo'iv 
 
iyo 
 
 flAATONOS 
 
 (tOcll to. irepi ras nuAei? 181a. ko! 8i~ifxoaLa tovtolv fxrj p. 
 napayevo/Mvoiv dfx(jjolv d8vvaTov. 
 NE. 20. Tlco? yap ov ; 
 
 SE. Toi)ro 5?) re'Aoy v^da/iaros evdwrXoKia ^v/x- 
 5 7r\aK(i> yiyveaOai (f)apev TroXiTiKrjs irpd^eois, to tcov 
 
 dv8p€L(£>V KOI aC0(f)p6va>V dv0p(O7TU)V 7)009, biTorav 
 
 Ofiovola. Ka\ (f)iAla koivov ^vvayayovaa avTcov tov c 
 (3iov r) fiacriXiKr] t4\vtj, iravTwv /x€yaXo7rpe7r€aTaTOv 
 v(f)aa fidroiv Ka\ apiarov dnoTeXeaaaa, # a>V y * elvai 
 io kolvov, rovs t aXXov? iv rah iroXecri irdvTas 8ovXovs 
 kcu iXevOepovs dpm iaypvo a, crvveyr} tovtco tg> irXi- 
 yfiaTt, Kal KaO' ocrov ev8aip.ovL Trpoo-qKtL ylyveaOai. 
 TroXei, toutov /JL7]8a/mfj /jL7]8ev eXXehrovaa apyjl re /cat 
 emo-Tarf}. 
 
 3' 
 
 following. The words are re- 
 jected by Ast, who conjectured 
 Ira/Mov, and Stallb., who here, as 
 elsewhere, unnecessarily sus- 
 pects a gloss. Qy. to{j.6v ? Cf. 
 Tim. 6 1 e. 
 
 4. Touto §77 — eVtorar^] " This, 
 then, according to our view, is 
 the perfection of the web of 
 political action, directly woven 
 — the brave and temperate in 
 human character, when the 
 kingly science has drawn the 
 lives of such men into com- 
 munion by unanimity and kind- 
 ness, and having thus com- 
 pleted the most glorious and 
 noble of all webs that are of 
 a public nature, and envelop- 
 ing therewith all other denizens 
 of cities, whether slaves or 
 free, binds them by this con- 
 texture into one, and leaving 
 out no point of a city's happi- 
 ness, in as far as it belongs to 
 a city to attain to happiness, 
 
 so governs and presides." For 
 (vdvTrXoKia, here metaphorically 
 applied, cf. supr. 283 a. 
 
 £vfj.7r\ai<ev] Bodl. All, £vfi- 
 tiKiKeiv, r. ^vfiirkeKev. ^vfiTTKaKev 
 
 is in keeping with the tragic 
 diction of much else in the 
 dialogue. Cf. Aesch. Ag. 1 1 7 1 : 
 
 opKOS, Trr/yna yevvaicos TTayev. 
 
 9. *co? y * eivai koivov] MSS. 
 coot'. Cf. SUpr., coy ye iv tto\i- 
 
 reiq. It seems to be implied 
 that, although this is the best 
 common life, a higher life is 
 reserved for the individual. 
 For the inf., cf. Rep. 4, 430 d. 
 But perhaps the words are a 
 gloss on koivov supra, as Stall- 
 bauni thinks. 
 
 1 1 . d/j.Tr[axovo-a ] Here the 
 Bodleian has dfioblo-xovaa (sic) 
 with An. 
 
 12. kcl&* ocrov ev^al/xovi K.r.X.] 
 
 Cf. Legg. 3, 697 b : ttjv peWov- 
 
 crav — ev8miiovr)0-eiv els hvvapiv 
 dvBpoiTrivrjv. 
 
II0AITIK02. 
 
 191 
 
 3". NE. 20. KdXXtara 
 TeXeaa? av8pa rijiiv, 
 
 TIKOV. 
 
 I. KdWurra k. r. A.] Some 
 
 editors have adopted Stallb.'s 
 conjecture, and have attributed 
 these words to the philosopher 
 Socrates. But it is not likely 
 that he would interpose with- 
 out giving Young Soci-ates time 
 to assent to the last proposi- 
 tion. The present expression 
 is merely an expanded and 
 more courteous form of assent, 
 marking the conclusion of the 
 argument. It has been already 
 
 av top fiacriXiKov aire- 
 h g«/e, koll top ttoXl- 
 
 noticcd, that the dramatic is 
 subordinated to the dialectical 
 interest of this dialogue. Hence 
 there is less motive for intro- 
 ducing the elder Socrates again. 
 Compare the end of the Par- 
 menides. Those, however, who 
 think that the praise is more 
 becoming in the mouth of the 
 philosopher, may suppose that 
 the answer of the younger So- 
 crates has dropt out, e. g. 'AXtj- 
 6e<iTaTd ye. Cf. Soph, ad fin. 
 
 The Btatc 
 thus consti- 
 tuted will 
 be an happy 
 as a com- 
 munity of 
 men can he. 
 
to/4/99 
 
 (Elavenbon press, ©yforb, 
 
 SELECT LIST OF STANDARD WORKS. 
 
 STANDARD LATIN WORKS .... Page i 
 
 STANDARD GREEK WORKS 3 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS STANDARD WORKS . „ 7 
 STANDARD THEOLOGICAL WORKS . . „ 8 
 
 1. STANDARD LATIN WORKS. 
 
 Avianus. The Fables. Edited. 
 
 with Prolegomena, Critical Appa- 
 ratus, Commentary, &c, by Robinson 
 Ellis, M.A., LL.D. 8vo. 8s. 6c?. 
 
 Caesar. Be Bello Gallico. 
 
 Books I-VII. According to the 
 Text of Emanuel Hoffmann 
 (Vienna, 1S90). Edited,with Intro- 
 duction and Notes, by St. George 
 Stock. Post 8vo, 10s. 6d. 
 
 Catulli "Veronensis Liber. 
 Iterum recognovit, Apparatum Cri- 
 ticum Prolegomena Appendices ad- 
 didit, R. Ellis, A.M. 8vo. 16s. 
 
 Catullus, a Commentary on. 
 
 By Robinson Ellis, M.A. Second 
 Edition. 8vo. iSs. 
 
 Cicero. Be Oratore Libri 
 
 Tres. With Introduction and Notes. 
 
 By A. S. Wilkins, Litt.D. Svo. 1 8s. 
 
 Also, separately, 
 
 Book I. 7s. 6d. Book II. 5s. 
 
 Book III. 6s. 
 
 Pro Milone. Edited by 
 
 A. C. Clark, M.A. Svo. 8s. 6d. 
 
 Select Letters. With 
 
 English Introductions, Notes, and 
 Appendices. By Albert Watson, 
 M.A. Fourth Edition. 8vo. 18s. 
 
 Horace. With a Commentary. 
 
 By E. C. Wickham, D. D. Two Vols. 
 Vol. I. The Odes, Carmen Secu- 
 
 lare, and Epodes. Third Edition. 
 
 8vo. 12 s. 
 Vol. II. The Satires, Epistles, and 
 
 De Arte Poetica. Svo. 1 2s. 
 
 Juvenal. Thirteen Satires. 
 
 Edited, with Introduction and 
 Notes, by C. H. Pearson, M.A., and 
 Herbert A. Strong, M.A., LL.D. 
 Second Edition. Crown Svo. 9s. 
 
 Manilius. Nodes Manilianae ; 
 
 sive Dissertationes in Astronomica Ma- 
 nila. Accedunt Coniecturae in Ger- 
 manici Aratea. Scripsit R. Ellis. 
 Crown Svo. 6s. 
 
 Merry. Selected Fragments 
 
 of Roman Poetry. Edited, with Intro- 
 duction and Notes, by W. W. 
 Merry, D.D. Second Edition. Crown 
 Svo. 6s. 6d. 
 
 Ovid. P. Ovidii Nasonis Ibis. 
 
 Ex Novis Codicibus edidit, Scholia 
 Vetera Commentarium cum Pro- 
 legomenis Appendice In dice addidit, 
 R. Ellis, A.M. Svo. 10s. 6d. 
 
 P. Ovidi Nasonis Tris- 
 
 iium Libri V. Recensuit S. G-. Owen, 
 A.M. 8vo. 1 6s. 
 
 Oxford: Clarendon Press. London: Henry Frowde, Amen Corner, E.C. 
 
STANDARD LATIN WORKS. 
 
 Persius. The Satires. With 
 
 n Translation and Commentary. 
 
 By John Conington, M.A. Edited 
 
 I . v Henry N\-tt loslii]., M.A. Third 
 
 Hon. 8vo. 8s. 6d. 
 
 Plautus. Rudens. Edited, 
 
 with Critical and Explanatory- 
 Notes, by E. A. Sonnenschein, 
 M.A. 8vo. 8s. 6d. 
 The Codex Turnebi of 
 
 Plautus. By W. M. Lindsay, M.A. 
 8vo, 2 is. net. 
 
 Quintilian. Institutionis 
 
 Oratoriae Liber Decimus. A Revised 
 Text, with Introductory Essays, 
 Critical Notes, &c. By W. Peterson, 
 M.A., LL.D. 8vo. 12s. 6d. 
 
 Rushforth. Latin Historical 
 
 Inscriptions, illustrating the History of 
 the Early Empire. By G. McN. 
 Rushforth, M.A. Svo. 10s. net. 
 
 Tacitus. The Annals. Edited, 
 
 with Introduction and Notes, by 
 H. Furneaux, M.A. 2 Vols. 8vo. 
 
 Vol. I, Books I-VI. Second Edition. 
 1 8s. 
 
 Vol. II, Books XI-XVI. 20s. 
 
 Tacitus. Be Germanic/. By 
 the same Editor. 8vo. 6s. 6d. 
 
 Vita Agricolae. By the 
 
 same Editor. 8vo. 6s. 6d. 
 
 DialoguB de Oratoribus. 
 
 A Revised Text, with Introductory 
 Essays, and Critical and Explana- 
 tory Notes. By W. Peterson, M.A., 
 LL.D. 8vo. 1 os. 6d. 
 
 Velleius Paterculus ad M. 
 
 Vinicium Libri Duo. Ex Amerbachii 
 praecipue Apographo edidit et 
 emendavit R. Ellis, Litterarum 
 Latinarum Professor publicus apud 
 Oxonienses. Crown 8vo, paper 
 boards. 6s. 
 
 Virgil. With an Introduc- 
 tion and Notes. By T. L. Papillon, 
 M.A., and A. E. Haigh, M.A. 
 2 vols. Crown 8vo. Cloth, 6s. each; 
 stiff covers 3s. 6d. each. 
 
 Also sold in parts, as follows — 
 Bucolics and Qeorgics, 2s. 6d. 
 Aeneid, in 4 parts, 2s. each. 
 
 King and Cookson. The Prin- 
 ciples of Sound and Inflexion, as illus- 
 trated in the Greek and Latin Languages. 
 By J. E. King,M.A., and Christopher 
 Cookson, M.A. Svo. 18s. 
 
 An Introduction to the 
 
 Comparative Grammar of Greek and 
 Latin. Crown Svo. 5s. 6d. 
 
 Lindsay. The Latin Lan- 
 guage. An Historical Account of 
 Latin Sounds, Sterns and Flexions. 
 By W. M. Lindsay, M.A. Demy 
 Svo. 2 is. 
 
 Nettleship. Lectures and 
 
 Essays on Subjects connected with Latin 
 
 Scholarship and Literature. By Henry 
 
 Nettleship, M.A. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 Second Series, edited by 
 
 F. J. Haverfield, with Memoir by 
 Mrs. Nettleship. Crown Svo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 Nettleship. Contributions to 
 
 Latin Lexicography. Svo. 21s. 
 
 Sellar. Roman Poets of the 
 
 Augustan Age. By W. Y. Sellar, 
 M.A. ; viz. 
 
 I. Virgil. New Edition. Crown 
 Svo. 9s. 
 II. Horace and the Elegiac 
 Poets. With a Memoir of the 
 Author by Andrew Lang, M.A., 
 and a Portrait. Svo. 14s. 
 
 — ; — Roman Poets of the Re- 
 public. Tliird Edition. Crown 8vo. 10s. 
 
 Wordsworth. Fragments and 
 
 Specimens of Early Latin. With Intro- 
 ductions and Notes. By J. Words- 
 worth, D.D. Svo. 1 8s. 
 
 Oxford : Clarendon 
 
STANDARD GREEK WORKS. 
 
 2. STANDARD 
 
 Chandler. A Practical Intro- 
 duction /a Greek Accent nation, \>y II. W. 
 Chandler, M.A. Second Edition. 
 i os. 6d. 
 
 Farnell. The Cu IU of the Greek 
 
 States. With Plates. By L. R. Farnell, 
 
 M.A. 
 Vols. I and II. Svo.' 32s. net. 
 Volume III in Preparation. 
 
 Grenfell. An Alexandrian 
 
 Erotic Fragment and other Greek Papyri, 
 chiefly Ptolemaic. Edited by B. P. 
 Grenfell, M.A. Small 4 to. 8s. 6d. 
 net. 
 Grenfell and Hunt. Neiv 
 Classical Fragments and other Greek 
 and Latin Papyri. Edited by B. P. 
 Grenfell, M.A., and A. S. Hunt, 
 M.A. With Plates, 1 2s. 6d. net. 
 
 Menanders Teooproc. 
 
 A Revised Text of the Geneva 
 Fragment. With a Translation 
 and Notes by the same Editors. 
 8vo, stiff covers, is. 6d. 
 
 Grenfell and Mahaffy. Rev- 
 enue Laws of Ptolemy Philadelphia. 
 2 vols. Text and Plates, il. us. 6d. 
 
 net. 
 
 Haigh. The Attic Theatre. 
 
 A Description of the Stage and 
 Theatre of the Athenians, and of 
 the Dramatic Performances at 
 Athens. By A. E. Haigh, M.A. 
 
 Second Edition, Bevised and Enlarged. 
 Svo. 12s. 6d. 
 
 GREEK WORKS. 
 
 Haigh. The Tragic Drama of 
 
 the Greeks. With Illustrations. 
 
 8vo. 1 2s. 6d. 
 Head. Historia Numorum: 
 
 A Manual of Greek Numismatics. 
 
 By Barclay V. Head. Royal Svo, 
 
 half-hound, 2l. 2s. 
 
 Hicks. A Manual of Greek 
 
 Historical Inscriptions. By E. L. 
 Hicks, M.A. Svo. 10s. 6d. 
 
 Hill. Sources for Greek His- 
 tory between the Persian and Pelopon- 
 nesian Wars. Collected and arranged 
 by G. F. Hill, M.A. Svo. 10s. 6d. 
 
 Kenyon. The Palaeography 
 
 of Greek Papiyri- Ey Frederic G. 
 Kenyon, M.A. Svo, with Twenty 
 Facsimiles,and aTable of Alphabets. 
 
 1 os. 6rf. 
 
 Liddell and Scott. A Greek- 
 English Lexicon, by H. G. Liddell, 
 D. D., and Robert Scott, D. D. Eighth 
 Edition, Revised. 4to. il. 16s. 
 
 Monro. Modes of Ancient 
 Greek Music. By D. B. Monro, M.A. 
 Svo. 8s. 6d. net. 
 
 Paton and Hicks. The In- 
 scriptions of Cos. By W. R. Paton 
 and E. L. Hicks. Royal Svo, linen, 
 with Map, 28s. 
 
 Smyth. The Sounds and 
 
 Inflections of the Greek Dialects (Ionic). 
 By H. Weir Smyth, Ph.D. 8vo. 24s. 
 Thompson. A Glossary of 
 Greek Birds. By D'Arcy W. Thomp- 
 son. Svo, buckram, 10s. net. 
 
 Aeschinem et IsocvoXem, Scho- 
 lia Graeca in. Edidit G. Dindorfius. 
 Svo. 4s. 
 Aeschylus. In Single Plays. 
 With Introduction and Notes, by 
 Arthur Sidgwick, M.A. New 
 Edition. Extra fcap. Svo. 3s. each. 
 I. Agamemnon. II. Choephoroi. 
 
 III. Eumenides. 
 IV. Prometheus Bound. With 
 Introduction and Notes, by 
 A. 0. Prickard, M.A. Third 
 Edition. 2s. 
 
 Aeschyli quae supersunt in 
 
 Codice Laurentiano quoad effici potuit et 
 ad cognitionem necesse est visum iypis 
 descripta edidit R. Merkel. Small 
 folio, il. is. 
 
 Aeschylus : Tragoediae et 
 Fragmenta, ex recensione Guil. Din- 
 dorfii. Second Edition. Svo. 5s. 6d. 
 
 Annotationes Guil. Din- 
 
 dorfii. Partes II. Svo. 10s. 
 
 London: Henry Frowde, Amen Coiner, E.C. 
 
STANDARD GREEK WORKS. 
 
 Apsinis ct Longini Rhctoricc . 
 
 E CodioibuB mss. rocensuit .Toll. 
 
 Bakius. 8vo. 3s. 
 Aristophanes. A Complete 
 
 Concordance to the Comedies and Frag- 
 ments. By H. Dunbar, M.D. 4to. 
 ll. is. 
 
 Comoediae et Fragmenta, 
 
 ex recensione Guil. Dindorfii. 
 Tomi II. Svo. 1 is. 
 
 Annotationes Guil. Din- 
 dorfii. Partes II. 8vo. 1 is. 
 
 Scholia Graeca ex Co- 
 
 dicibus aucta et emendata a Guil. 
 Dindorfio. Partes III. 8vo. il. 
 
 In Single Plays. Edited, 
 
 with English Notes, Introductions, 
 &c, by W. W. Merry, D.D. Extra 
 fcap. Svo. 
 
 TheAcharnians. Fourth Edition, 3s. 
 
 The Birds. Third Edition, 3s. 6d. 
 
 The Clouds. Third Edition, 3s. 
 
 The Frogs. Third Edition, 3s. 
 
 The Knights. Second Edition, 3s. 
 
 The Wasps. 3s. 6d. 
 Aristotle. Ex recensione 
 
 Im. Bekkeri. Accedunt Indices 
 Sylburgiani. Tomi XI. 8vo. 2I. 10s. 
 The volumes (except I and IX) may 
 be had separately, price 5s. 6d. each. 
 
 Ethica Nicomachea, re- 
 cognovit brevique Adnotatione 
 critica instruxit I. Bywater. Svo. 6s. 
 Also in crown 8vo, paper cover, 3s. 6d. 
 
 Contributions to the 
 
 Textual Criticism of the Nicoma- 
 chean Ethics. By I. Bywater. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Notes on the Nieoma- 
 
 cheanEthics. ByJ.A. Stewart,M.A. 
 2 vols. 8vo. 32s. 
 
 Selecta ex Organo A ris- 
 
 toteleo Capitula. In usum Scho- 
 larum Academicarum. Crown 8vo, 
 stiff covers. 3s. 6d. 
 
 Be Arte Poetica Liber. 
 
 Kecognovit Brevique Adnotatione 
 Critica Instruxit I. Bywater, Litter- 
 arum Graecarum Professor Eegius. 
 Post 8vo, stiff covers, is. 6d. 
 
 Aristotle. The Politics, with 
 Introductions, Notes, &c, by W. L. 
 Newman, M.A. Vols. I and II. 
 Medium Svo. 28s. 
 
 Vols. Ill and IV. [/n the Press.'] 
 
 The Politics, trans- 
 lated into English, with Intro- 
 duction, Marginal Analysis, Notes, 
 and Indices, by B. Jowett, M.A. 
 Medium Svo. 2 vols. 21s. 
 
 The English Manuscripts 
 
 of the Nicomachean Ethics, described in 
 relation to Bekker's Manuscripts and 
 other Sources. By J. A. Stewart, 
 M.A. (Anecdota Oxon. ) Small 4to. 
 3s. 6d. 
 
 Physics. Book VII. 
 
 Collation of various mss. ; with In- 
 troduction by R. Shute, M.A. (Anec- 
 dota Oxon. ) Small 4to. 2s. 
 
 Choerobosci Dictata in Theo- 
 
 dosii Canones, necnon Epimerismi in 
 Psalmos. E Codicibus mss. edidit 
 Thomas Gaisford, S.T.P. Tomi III. 
 8vo. 15s. 
 
 Demosthenes. Ex recensione 
 
 G. Dindorfii. Tomi IX. 8vo. 2l. 6s. 
 
 Separately — 
 
 Text, il. is. Annotations, 15s. 
 
 Scholia, 10s. 
 
 Demosthenes and Aeschines. 
 
 The Orations of Demosthenes and 
 Aeschines on the Crown. With 
 Introductory Essays and Notes. By 
 G. A. Simcox, M.A., and W. H. 
 Simcox, M.A. 8vo. 12s. 
 
 Demosthenes. Orations 
 
 against Philip. With Introduction 
 and Notes, by Evelyn Abbott, M.A., 
 and P. E. Matheson, M.A. 
 
 Vol. I. Philippic I. Olynthiacs 
 
 I-III. Extra fcap. 8vo. 3s. 
 Vol. II. De Pace, Philippic II. 
 De Chersoneso, Philippic III. 
 Extra fcap. 8vo. 4s. 6d. 
 
 Euripides. Tragoediae et 
 
 Fragmenta, ex recensione Guil. Din- 
 dorfii. Tomi II. 8vo. 10s. 
 
 Oxford : Clarendon Press. 
 
STANDARD GREEK WORKS. 
 
 Euripides. 
 
 Guil. Dindorfii 
 
 Annotationes 
 
 Partes II. 8vo. 
 
 Scholia Graeca, ex Codi- 
 
 aibus aucta et emendata a Guil. 
 Dindorfio. Tomi IV. 8vo. ll. 16s. 
 
 Hephaestionis Enchiridion, 
 
 Terentianus Maurus, Proclus, &c. Edidit 
 T. Gaisford,S.T.P. Tomi II. ios. 
 
 Heracliti Ephesii Reliquiae. 
 
 Recensuit I. Bywater, M. A. Appen- 
 dicis loco additae sunt Diogenis 
 Laertii Vita Heracliti, Particulae 
 Hippocratei De Diaeta Lib. I. , Epi- 
 stolae Heracliteae. 8vo. 6s. 
 
 Herodotus. Books V and VI, 
 
 Terpsichore and Erato.- Edited, 
 with Notes and Appendices, by- 
 Evelyn Abbott, M.A., LL.D. 8vo, 
 with two Maps, ios. 6d. 
 
 Homer. A Complete Con- 
 cordance to the Odyssey and Hymns of 
 Homer; to which is added a Con- 
 cordance to the Parallel Passages in 
 the Iliad, Odyssey, and Hymns. 
 By Henry Dunbar, M.D. 4to. 
 iZ. is. 
 
 A Grammar of the Ho- 
 meric Dialed. By D. B. Monro, M. A. 
 8vo. Second Edition. 14s. 
 
 Ilias, ex rec. Guil. Din- 
 dorfii. 8vo. 5s. 6d. 
 
 Scholia Graeca in 
 
 Hiadem. Edited by W. Dindorf, 
 after a new collation of the Venetian 
 mss. by D. B. Monro, M.A. 4 vols. 
 8vo. 2l. ios. 
 
 Scholia Graeca in 
 
 Hiadem Townleyana. Recensuit 
 Ernestus Maass. 2 vols. 8vo. 
 il. 16s. 
 
 ex rec. G. 
 
 5s. 6d. 
 
 Graeca in 
 
 Edidit Guil. Dindorfius. 
 8vo. 15s. 6d. 
 
 Dindorfii. 8vo 
 
 Scholia 
 
 Tomi II. 
 
 Homer. Odyssey. Books I- 
 XII. Edited with English Notes, 
 Appendices, &c. By W. W. Merry, 
 D.D., and James Riddell, M.A. 
 
 Srcoiul Villi ion. NV". 1 6s. 
 
 Books 
 
 B. Mom 
 
 XIII- 
 
 >, M.A. 
 
 XXIV. By D. 
 
 [In the Press.'] 
 
 Hymni Homerici. Codi- 
 
 cibus denuo collatis recensuit 
 Alfred us Goodwin. Small folio. 
 With four Plates. 2 is. net. 
 
 Homeri Opera et Reliquiae. 
 
 Monro. Crown 8vo. India Paper. 
 Cloth, ios. 6d. net. 
 Also in various leather bindings. 
 
 Oratores Attici, ex recensione 
 Bekkeri : 
 
 Vol. III. Isaeus, Aeschines, 
 Lycurgus, Dinarchus, &c. 
 8vo. 7s. 
 [Vols. I and II are out of print] 
 
 Index Andocideus, Ly- 
 
 curgeus, Dinarcheus, confectus a 
 Ludovico Learning Forman, Ph.D. 
 8vo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 Paroemiographi Graeci, quo- 
 rum pars nunc primum ex Codd. mss. 
 vulgatur. Edidit T. Gaisford, S.T.P. 
 1836. 8vo. 5s. 6d. 
 
 Plato. Apology, with a re- 
 vised Text and English Notes, and 
 a Digest of Platonic Idioms, by 
 James Riddell, M.A. Svo. 8s. 6d. 
 
 Philebus, with a revised 
 
 Text and English Notes, by Edward 
 Poste, M.A. Svo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 Republic. The Greek 
 
 Text. Edited, with Notes and 
 Essays, by B. Jowett, M.A. and 
 Lewis Campbell, M.A. In three 
 vols. Medium Svo. 2I. 2s. 
 
 Sophistes and Politicus, 
 
 with a revised Text and English 
 Notes, by L. Campbell, M.A. Svo. 
 ios. 6d. 
 
 London: Henry Frowde, Amen Corner, E.O. 
 
STANDARD GREEK WORKS 
 
 Plato. T// ('<<<>!('/ tis, with a re- 
 vised Text and English Notes, by 
 L. Campbell, M.A. Second Edition. 
 8vo. i os. 6d. 
 
 The Dialogues, trans- 
 lated into English, with Analyses 
 and Introductions, by B. Jowett, ! 
 M.A. Third Edition. 5 vols, medium 
 8vo. Cloth, 4?. 4s.; half-morocco, 5?. 
 
 The Republic, translated 
 
 into English, with Analysis and 
 Introduction, by B. Jowett, M.A. 
 Third Edition. Medium 8vo. 1 2s. 6d. ; 
 half- roan, 14s. 
 
 With Introduction and 
 
 Notes. By St. George Stock, M.A. 
 Extra fcap. 8vo. 
 
 I. The Apology, 2s. 6d. 
 II. Crito, 2s. III. Meno, 2s. 6d. 
 
 Selections. With Intro- 
 ductions and Notes. By John Purves, 
 M.A., and Preface by B. Jowett, 
 M.A. Second Edition. Extra fcap. 
 Svo. 5s. 
 
 A Selection of Passages 
 
 from Plato for English Readers; from 
 the Translation byB. Jowett, M.A. 
 Edited, with Introductions, by 
 M. J. Knight. 2 vols. Crown Svo, 
 gilt top. 12s. 
 
 Plotinus. Ediclit F. Creuzer. 
 
 Tomi III. 4to. il. 8s. 
 
 Polybius. Selections. Edited 
 
 by J. L. Strachan- Davidson, M.A. 
 With Maps. Medium Svo. 2 is. 
 
 Plutarehi Moralia, id est, 
 
 Opera, exceptis Vitis, reliqua. Edidit 
 Daniel Wyttenbach. Accedit Index 
 Graecitatis. Tomi VIII. Partes 
 XV. 1795-1830. Svo, cloth, 2,1. 1 os. 
 
 Sophocles. The Plays and 
 
 Fragments. With English Notes and 
 Introductions, by Lewis Campbell, 
 M.A. 2 vols. Svo, 1 6s. each. 
 Vol.1. Oedipus Tyrannus. Oedi- 
 pus Coloneus. Antigone. 
 Vol. II. Ajax. Electra. Trachi- 
 niae. Philoctetes. Fragments. 
 
 Sophocles. Tragoediae et 
 
 Fragmenta, ex recensions et cum 
 • ■••in iii<-iit :irii.s Guil. Dindorfii. Third 
 Edition. 2 vols. Fcap. Svo. 
 Each Play separately, limp, 
 
 t otim 
 
 i. Third 
 
 ll. 18. 
 28. 6rf. 
 
 Tragoediae et Fragmenta 
 
 cum Annotationibus Guil. Dindorfii. 
 Tomi II. 8vo. 10s. 
 
 The Text, Vol. I. 5s. 6d. 
 
 The Notes, Vol. II. 4s. 6d. 
 
 Stobaei Florilegium. Ad 
 
 mss. fidem emendavit et supplevit 
 T. Gaisford, S.T.P. Tomi IV. 8vo. it 
 
 Eclogarum Physicarum 
 
 et Ethicarum libri duo. Accedit 
 Hieroclis Commentarius in aurea 
 carmina Pythagoreorum. Ad mss. 
 Codd. recensuit T. Gaisford, S.T.P. 
 Tomi II. Svo. us. 
 
 Strabo. Selections, with an 
 
 Introduction on Strabo's Life and 
 Works. By H. F. Tozer, M.A., 
 F.R.G.S. Svo. With Maps and 
 Plans. 12 s. 
 
 Theodoreti Graecarum Affec- 
 
 tionum Ouratio. Ad Codices mss. 
 recensuit T. Gaisford, S.T.P. Svo. 
 7s. 6d. 
 
 Thueydides. Translated into 
 
 English, with Introduction, Mar- 
 ginal Analysis, Notes, and Indices. 
 By B. Jowett, M.A. [Reprinting.'] 
 
 Xenophon. Ex recensione et 
 
 cum annotationibus L. Dindorfii. 
 Historia Graeca. Second Edition . 
 
 Svo. 1 os. 6d. 
 Expeditio Cyri. Second Edition. 
 
 8vo. ios.6d. 
 Institutio Cyri. 8vo. 10s. 6d. 
 Memorabilia Socratis. Svo. js. 6d. 
 Opuscula Politica Eqtieslria et 
 
 Venatica cum Arriani Libello 
 
 de Venatione. 8vo. 10s. 6d. 
 
 Oxford: Clarendon Press. 
 
MISCELLANEOUS STANDARD WORKS. 
 
 3. MISCELLANEOUS 
 
 Arbuthnot. The Life and 
 
 Works of John Arbuthnot. By George 
 A. Aitken. Svo, cloth extra, with 
 Portrait, 16s. 
 
 Bacon. The Essays. Edited 
 
 with Introduction and Illustrative 
 Notes, by S. H. Reynolds, M.A. 
 Svo, half-bound, 1 2s. 6d. 
 
 Casaubon (Isaac), 1559-1614. 
 By Mark Pattison, late Eector of 
 Lincoln College. Second Edition. 
 Svo. 1 6s. 
 
 Finlay. A History of Greece 
 
 from its Conquest by the Romans to the 
 present time, B.C. 146 to a. d. 1864. 
 By George Finlay, LL.D. A new 
 Edition, revised throughout, and in 
 part re-written, with considerable 
 additions, by the Author, and edited 
 by H. F. Tozer, M.A. 7 vols. Svo. 
 ll. 1 os. 
 
 Gaii Institutionum Juris 
 
 Civilis Commentarii Quattuor ; or, Ele- 
 ments of Eoman Law by Gaius. 
 With a Translation and Commen- 
 tary by Edward Poste, M.A. Third 
 Edition. Svo. iSs. 
 
 Hodgkin. Italy and her In- 
 vaders. With Plates and Maps. By 
 Thomas Hodgkin, D.C.L. a.d. 
 376-744. Svo. Vols. I and II, Second 
 Edition, 2l. 2s. Vols. Ill and IV, 
 Second Edition, ll. 16s. Vols. V and 
 VI, it. 16s. Vol. VII. In the Press. 
 
 Hooker, Sir J. D., and B. D. 
 
 Jackson. Index Keivensis. 2 vols. 
 4to. 10I. 1 os. net. 
 
 Ilbert. The Government of 
 
 India ; being a Digest of the Statute 
 Law relating thereto. With 
 Historical Introduction and Illus- 
 trative Documents. By Sir 
 Courtenay Ilbert, K.C.S.I. Svo, 
 half-roan, 2 is. 
 
 STANDARD WORKS. 
 
 Justinian. Imperatoris Tus- 
 
 tiniam Institutionum Libri Quattuor', 
 with Introductions, Commentary, 
 Excursus and Translation. By 3 . B. 
 Moyle, D.C.L. Third Edition. 2 vols. 
 Svo. 22s. 
 
 Machiavelli. II Principe. 
 
 Edited by L. Arthur Burd. With 
 an Introduction by Lord Acton. 
 
 Svo. 14s. 
 
 Pattison. Essays by the late 
 
 Hark Pattison, sometime Rector of 
 Lincoln College. Collected and 
 Arranged by Henry Nettleship, 
 M.A. 2 vols. 8vo. 24s. 
 Payne. History of the Ne%v 
 World called America. By E. J. 
 Payne, M.A. Svo, Vol. I, 18s. ; 
 Vol. II, 14s. 
 
 Kalegh. Sir Walter Ralegh. 
 
 A Biography. By W. Stebbing, 
 M.A. Svo. 10s. 6d. 
 
 Ramsay. The Cities and 
 
 Bishoprics ofPhrygia ; being an Essay 
 on the Local History of Phrygia, 
 from the Earliest Times to the 
 Turkish Conquest, By W. M. 
 Ramsay,D.C.L.,LL.D. Vol.1. Part 
 I. The Lycos Valley and South-Western 
 Phrygia. Royal Svo, linen, 18s. net. 
 Vol. I. Part II. West and West- 
 Central Phrygia. Royal Svo, linen, 
 2 is. net. 
 
 Stokes. The Anglo -Indian 
 
 Codes. By Whitley Stokes, LL.D. 
 Vol. I. Substantive Law. 8vo. 30s. 
 Vol. II. Adjective Law. 8vo. 35s. 
 
 Strachey. Hastings and The 
 
 Bohilla War. By Sir John Strachey, 
 G.C.S.I. Svo, cloth, 10s. 6d. 
 
 Thomson. Notes on Recent 
 
 Researches in Electricity and Magnetism. 
 By J. J.Thomson, M.A.,F.R.S. Svo. 
 iSs. 6d. 
 Woodhouse. Aetolia; its 
 
 Geography, Tojmgraphy, and Antiquities. 
 By William J. Woodhouse, M.A., 
 FlR.G.S. With Maps and Illus- 
 trations. Royal Svo, linen, price 
 
 2 is. net. 
 
 London : Henry Frowpe, Amen Corner, E.C. 
 
STANDARD THEOLOGICAL WORKS. 
 
 4. STANDARD THEOLOGICAL WORKS, &c. 
 
 St. Basil : The Booh of St. 
 
 Basil on the Holy Spirit. A Kevised 
 Text, with Notes and Introduction 
 by C. F. H. Johnston, M.A. Crown 
 
 8vo. 7.S. (til. 
 
 The Coptic Version of the 
 
 New Testament, in the Northern 
 Dialect, otherwise called Memphitic and 
 Bohairic. With Introduction, Criti- 
 cal Apparatus, and Literal English 
 Translation. The Gospels. 2 vols. 
 8vo. 2l. 2S. 
 
 Bright. Chapters of Early 
 
 English Church History. By W. Bright, 
 D.D. Third Edition. 8vo. 1 2s. 
 
 Canons of the First Four 
 
 General Councils of Nicaea, Con- 
 stantinople, Ephesus, and Chalcedon. 
 With Notes, by W. Bright, D.D. 
 Second Edition. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 The Book of Enoch. Trans- 
 lated from Dillmann'sEthiopic Text 
 (emended and revised), and Edited 
 by K. H. Charles, M.A. Svo. 16s. 
 
 Conybeare . Th e Key of Truth. 
 A Manual of the Paulician Church 
 of Armenia. The Armenian Text, 
 edited and translated with illus- 
 trative Documents and Intro- 
 duction by F. C. Conybeare, M.A. 
 Svo. 15s. net. 
 
 Driver. The Parallel Psalter, 
 
 being the Prayer-Book Version of 
 the Psalms and a New Version, ar- 
 ranged in parallel columns. With an 
 Introduction and Glossaries. By 
 the Rev. S. R. Driver, D.D., Litt.D. 
 Extra fcap. Svo. 6s. 
 
 Ecclesiasticus (xxxix. 15 — 
 xlix. 11). The Original Hebrew, 
 with Early Versions and Knglish 
 Translations, itc. Edited by A. 
 Cowley, M.A., and Ad. Neubaueb, 
 M.A. 4to. 10s. 6d. net. 
 
 Hatch and Redpath. A Con- 
 corda/nce to the Greek Versions and 
 
 J/inrrif/iltiil Jinnl.-s of the Old Testament. 
 By the late Edwin Hatch, M.A., and 
 H. A. Redpath, M.A. In Six Parts. 
 Imperial 4to. 21s. each. 
 
 Ommanney. A Critical Dis- 
 sertation on the Athanasian Creed. Its 
 Original Language, Bate, Authorship^ 
 Titles, Text, Reception, and Use. By 
 G. D. W. Ommanney, M.A. 8vo. 
 1 6s. 
 
 Turner. Ecclesiae Occiden- 
 
 talis Monumenta Iuris Antiquissima : 
 Canonum et Conciliorum Grae- 
 corum Interpretationes Latinae. 
 Edidit Cuthbertus Hamilton 
 Turner, A.M. Fasc. I. pars. I. 
 4to, stiff covers, 10s. 6d. 
 
 Wordsworth and "White. 
 
 Nouum Testamenlum Domini Nostri 
 Iesu Christi Latine, secundum Edi- 
 tionem Sancti Hieronymi. Ad 
 Codicum Manuscriptorum fidem 
 recensuit Iohannes Wordsworth, 
 S.T.P., Episcopus Sarisburiensis ; 
 in operis societatem adsumto 
 Henrico Iuliano White, A.M. 4to. 
 Pars I, buckram, 2l. 12s. bd. 
 
 Also, separately — 
 Fasc. I. 1 2s 6d. ; Fasc. II. 7s 6d. ; 
 Fasc. III. 12s. 6d. ; Fasc. IV. 10s. 6d. 
 Fasc. V. 10s. 6d. 
 
 Oxfotb 
 
 AT THE CLARENDON PRESS 
 LONDON: HENRY FROWDE 
 
 OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE, AMEN CORNER, E.C. 
 
 *?-£$ 
 

 
 
 
 ^ V ^o X 
 
 
 
 
 
 , f 
 
 
 fi X 
 
 o N 
 
 
 2 . \ . 
 
 
 -X' 
 
 ^ ■«•, 
 
 r> O V 
 
 .cr c ° * " % 
 
 
 
 
 ■v <$*, 
 
 
 
 
 - : - >-- ^j ^ 
 

 
 
 « 
 
 
 f : 
 
 £ '*** 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 %. ^ 
 
 ^> V 
 
 & \